UKH

Can anybody recommend a decent wide angle landscape lens for a Nikon D3200. Budget wise, don't want to spend over £300

Thanks 

2nd hand Tokina 11-14

Tokina 11-16 F2.8. DXII Pro

I use it on my canons it's one of my favourite lenses

https://www.jessops.com/p/tokina/at-x-11-16mm-f-2-8-pro-dx-ii-lens-for-niko...

Easily find one on the auction site for less than 300 used & VGC

I’ve moved to full frame but Have owned both the above Tokina lenses and can highly recommend them. Very much underrated used as my main landscape lens for Nikon aps bodies for a number of years.

if you go back a in my gallery I think the lens Is listed in the camera details for some shots to give you an idea.

I often find ultra wide angle not great for landscapes, due to the perspective making mountains and hill seem small.  i find 28-35mm EFL the best.

Agree with Harlequin. A very short focal length lens is not always the best. The brain is brilliant at concentrating on the parts of the scene you are interested in and is able to very quickly flick from one part to another, giving a selective impression. The camera has no truck with all this selective malarkey and faithfully records what is presented to the sensor, including, for example, the really tiny little image of the mountain that appeared so impressive when you looked at it.

The lens I use most for landscape work is the 18-55mm  lens I got with my camera(as the camera has a 1.5 crop factor it give the field of view of a 27-82.5mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera), but not often is it used a 18mm.

Dave   

It can be just what is needed for a wide sweeping view, but just as often, if not more, it can be really good when you are quite close to the mountains where you need it just to get much in the frame.  

+1 for the Tokina 11-16 F2.8. DXII Pro. Loved it on my D7200.

As others have said points of interest can get a little lost at the shorter focal lengths, but it is great though rather substantial lens. 

Sigma 10 - 20mm F4-5.6 is a great landscape lens. Had one for years on my Nikon and almost never look it off. 

When I used film I found that a 28-70 lens covered most landscape scenes but a very wide angle had some great uses so it became a specialist lens in the kit. On moving to my first DSLR I bought an 18-70 lens in a kit which was the equivalent with a bit extra. I also supplemented it with a 10-20 Sigma which is a very good lens, so on balance I agree with several others on here that it has its uses but is not the one to keep on the camera as the norm for landscapes.

As an aside to this thread here you may be interested in this tale. My first DSLR lens was a Nikon 18-70 as I said but I later bought a D90 kit with an 18-105 lens which was great until one day I couldn't get it off the camera - it would only turn a small amount and not enough to remove it. After several hours of trying slightly different movements I suspected the locking pin had stuck so I tried different orientations and eventually the lens came free and out dropped a small piece of plastic from a broken lens mount on the lens. I had it repaired but only with a replacement plastic mount, metal was not an option. On examining the old 18-70 it is metal  and the 18-140 I bought later is also metal and it now acts as my standard lens on my D7100.

I have no idea how the mount was damaged - no drops, hits or clumsy fitting, just watch out for plastic mounts.

Fatigue most likely... that's the problem with some plastics.

I'll echo what others have said, whilst I do love the Tokina, it's only suitable for certain shots.  I've got landscapes taken at 150mm EFL. It just depends on what shot you are after.

In my kit I've got 11-16 Tokina, 18-55 Canon kit lens (F5.6), 18-135 Canon (F4 i think), 105 mm Sigma (F2.8), Sigma 150-600, all of which have done good "Landscape Pictures" for me