Looking for an ultra-wide angle lens

[CIC]

Thank you @Manfred and @xpatUSA.

Both of you are right. It won't be a good investment as my preferred macro work doesn't require such a short focal length.

So, the oy question remains is should I go.for the Nikkor 10-20mm considering it's price being the least of all, but delivers comparable, if not better, image quality?

Thanks again.

[Manfred M]

So, the oy question remains is should I go.for the Nikkor 10-20mm considering it's price being the least of all, but delivers comparable, if not better, image quality?

The lens is only one of the drivers of image quality. The camera itself (yours is around 5 years old), technique and output are all considerations that impact image quality.

If all you do is display images on the internet, I would not get too concerned about either the camera or the lens as you are generally showing images that are only around 2MP, so down-sampling hides all kinds of image quality issues. If you do a lot of large format prints, then the lens selection might play an more important role.

I use a heavy-duty tripod whenever I can in my work. I do a lot of it with studio lights that help freeze motion. I take care when focusing and try to shoot using the "sweet spot" apertures of my lens (usually 2 - 3 stops down from wide open).

That lens should perform well for you, from an image quality standpoint, so long as you do everything else right. Ultra-wide angle lenses tend to be more forgiving when it comes to a bit of camera shake and they tend to be used in a way that depth of field is not a significant issue.

[CIC]

The lens is only one of the drivers of image quality. The camera itself (yours is around 5 years old), technique and output are all considerations that impact image quality.

If all you do is display images on the internet, I would not get too concerned about either the camera or the lens as you are generally showing images that are only around 2MP, so down-sampling hides all kinds of image quality issues. If you do a lot of large format prints, then the lens selection might play an more important role.

I use a heavy-duty tripod whenever I can in my work. I do a lot of it with studio lights that help freeze motion. I take care when focusing and try to shoot using the "sweet spot" apertures of my lens (usually 2 - 3 stops down from wide open).

That lens should perform well for you, from an image quality standpoint, so long as you do everything else right. Ultra-wide angle lenses tend to be more forgiving when it comes to a bit of camera shake and they tend to be used in a way that depth of field is not a significant issue.

Thank you for your advice Manfred.

I do a lot of stock, and send my landscape images to agencies. I also make large prints of photos. Rather, I do not publish my images on Social Networks that much. I use a tripod, which is good, but not great, it is Zomei carbon fibre one with a ball head. This brand is from China, and costs comparatively much less to the established tripod brands available in our market but provides pretty good support even for my heavy 300mm.

So, is it Nikkor 10-20mm still, or you would advise something else?

[Manfred M]

Thank you for your advice Manfred.

I do a lot of stock, and send my landscape images to agencies. I also make large prints of photos. Rather, I do not publish my images on Social Networks that much. I use a tripod, which is good, but not great, it is Zomei carbon fibre one with a ball head. This brand is from China, and costs comparatively much less to the established tripod brands available in our market but provides pretty good support even for my heavy 300mm.

So, is it Nikkor 10-20mm still, or you would advise something else?

I have been primarily shooting full frame (D800 and D810) since 2012, so my "go to" UWA lens is the Nikkor f/2.8 14-24mm.

I shoot very little with APS-C sensor camera anymore, but when I do, I borrow my wife's D7500, but usually with the 18-200mm lens. The D7500 has a built-in motor, so it handles the Tokina f/2.8 11 - 16mm lens quite well.

[proseak]

I shoot in raw, so have no problems with CA.

Peter, I don't understand how shooting in raw affects CA produced by a lens.

The CA is corrected in the raw conversion.

[xpatUSA]

I shoot in raw, so have no problems with CA.

Peter, I don't understand how shooting in raw affects CA produced by a lens.

The CA is corrected in the raw conversion.

Thanks. My raw converter doesn't do that.

[proseak]

My raw converter doesn't do that.

I use DxO - you?

[xpatUSA]

My raw converter doesn't do that.

I use DxO - you?

I use Sigma Photo Pro V5.5.3 ...

[William W]

. . . Price wise Nikkor 10-20mm is the cheapest. In case you think Nikkor 10-20is the one that I should opt for, should I go for the bundle deal with 40mm Dx Macro? It would cost me around 13k extra. I already have a Tamron 90mm Macro lens.

That's a simple question, it is just that you are probably asking it now with bias you now have because you've been influenced by the marketing hype: you didn't come here asking about what macro lens to buy, you already have a macro lens, it occurs to me a macro lens was never in your thinking, so unless you previously had a 40mm macro lens on your "must get list", don't put it on there now, based only upon the marketing hype presented to you.

WW

[William W]

. . . I do a lot of stock, and send my landscape images to agencies. I also make large prints of photos. . . So, is it Nikkor 10-20mm still, or you would advise something else?

I do not wish to be indelicate: if the purpose is for sales in Stock Landscape Photography, what are your sales percentages from APS-C format files? That's the main question. If your sales are lower than the top 20%, I reckon there are other (technical) filters which Stock Agencies (typically) have, and which will require addressing, other than the choice of zoom lens and CA.

If this is a essentially a business choice, then on the face of it, for Stock Landscape Sales, I would be re-thinking my investment based initially on a 135 Format Kit (aka "Full Frame").

WW

[CIC]

I do not wish to be indelicate: if the purpose is for sales in Stock Landscape Photography, what are your sales percentages from APS-C format files? That's the main question. If your sales are lower than the top 20%, I reckon there are other (technical) filters which Stock Agencies (typically) have, and which will require addressing, other than the choice of zoom lens and CA.

If this is a essentially a business choice, then on the face of it, for Stock Landscape Sales, I would be re-thinking my investment based initially on a 135 Format Kit (aka "Full Frame").

WW

Hello

Sorry for this delayed response. Actually, almost all of stock sales are landscapes. Investing in a full frame system is really tempting, but sadly not economically viable. These photographic equipments when priced in my country's currency, those go out of reach of most like myself. Now, I have two choices, either to give up photography, or try to make best out of the situation. And I always opt for the second one. That is why I asked for 10-20mm instead of 14-24mm.

[xpatUSA]

Actually, almost all of stock sales are landscapes. Investing in a full frame system is really tempting, but sadly not economically viable. These photographic equipments when priced in my country's currency, those go out of reach of most like myself. Now, I have two choices, either to give up photography, or try to make best out of the situation. And I always opt for the second one.

Srijan namaste kem cho?

May I suggest that the quality of modern APS-C sensors is good enough for professional landscape work and that you don't NEED a 135-format sensor?

That is why I asked for 10-20mm instead of 14-24mm.

For the choice of zoom range for landscape work, there are many many opinions as to the "correct" range. I would choose a range that suits me personally -as you have already done.

P.S. My inclination is toward a lens that gives me about a 60 degrees wide view so that would be a zoom that includes 20mm -so my personal preference would be for 14-24mm, unlike your good self.

Good luck!

[rpcrowe]

I totally agree with Ted... Most APSC format cameras (even some older models) are adequate for landscape photography if equipped with decent lenses... I have done big prints with both Canon and APSC format cameras...

\As an example, this was done with an old Canon 30D DSLR equipped with a Tokina 12-24mm f/2 lens...

[CIC]

Srijan namaste kem cho?

May I suggest that the quality of modern APS-C sensors is good enough for professional landscape work and that you don't NEED a 135-format sensor?



For the choice of zoom range for landscape work, there are many many opinions as to the "correct" range. I would choose a range that suits me personally -as you have already done.

Good luck!

Thank you Ted and Richard. I would be grateful if you kindly visit the pages displaying my works and comment on the same.

@Ted, Namashkar! On a lighter note, I am Bengali Indian, and I speak only Bangla and English. 😀😀
Still, I appreciate it a lot that you have tried to make me feel more at home. 🙏
You would be amazed to know that we don't have any National language, and there are twenty two different languages of equal status in our country.

[xpatUSA]

@Ted, Namashkar! On a lighter note, I am Bengali Indian, and I speak only Bangla and English. 
Still, I appreciate it a lot that you have tried to make me feel more at home. 
You would be amazed to know that we don't have any National language, and there are twenty two different languages of equal status in our country.

Please pardon my use of Gujarati. Long ago, I dated a girl in England who spoke that language and I still remember a word or two. "kem cho" means "how are you" although you probably knew or guessed that.

Yes, I know about the many different languages, some VERY difference!

[CIC]

Please pardon my use of Gujarati. Long ago, I dated a girl in England who spoke that language and I still remember a word or two. "kem cho" means "how are you" although you probably knew or guessed that.

Yes, I know about the many different languages, some VERY difference!

My friend, there is no reason for you to apologize, I just wanted to clarify my linguistic origin. Rather I apologize to you if I have in any way could not express due appreciation to your kind gesture. Btw, it seems that Gujarati cuisine was not palatable for you.😂

[Manfred M]

Hello

Sorry for this delayed response. Actually, almost all of stock sales are landscapes. Investing in a full frame system is really tempting, but sadly not economically viable. These photographic equipments when priced in my country's currency, those go out of reach of most like myself. Now, I have two choices, either to give up photography, or try to make best out of the situation. And I always opt for the second one. That is why I asked for 10-20mm instead of 14-24mm.

Only you can determine the market you are looking to serve; any stock image that is sold for web-based end users does not need a full frame camera. The same comment goes for images sold for traditional publications; again the images that they use would work fine from a crop frame camera.

Where the full-frame camera starts to have an impact is for large prints in the fine art field or in the fashion photography industry where medium format cameras are still king.

Get the lens that you need and can afford.

P.S. I have been to India a number of times and it is an amazing country. The number of ethnic groups, languages, foods, history and scenery are just amazing. My daughter and her family lived in Bangalore for about 2-1/2 years, so it was a nice place to visit during the Canadian winters! I also spent close to 2 months in the Northern parts of India before my daughter and her family moved to India.

One of the places I wanted to visit were the Sundabans, but never managed to get there (yet).

[xpatUSA]

Btw, it seems that Gujarati cuisine was not palatable for you.

Unfortunately, it was me that was unpalatable to her mother. So off she went back to London and, shortly after, her photo appeared in "the book".

[William W]

Hello

Sorry for this delayed response. Actually, almost all of stock sales are landscapes. Investing in a full frame system is really tempting, but sadly not economically viable. These photographic equipments when priced in my country's currency, those go out of reach of most like myself. Now, I have two choices, either to give up photography, or try to make best out of the situation. And I always opt for the second one. That is why I asked for 10-20mm instead of 14-24mm.

Sorry for my delayed response, I was traveling/working and had little internet/telecoms coverage.

Thank you for the detail, I understand your response.

I advise you opt for the 10 to 20, irrespective of your choices apropos preferred Focal Lengths, contained in one zoom lens.

Rationale - considering both lenses under consideration are of reasonable quality, this is a choice of work tool: you already have an 18 to 55 which you indicate is providing an acceptable sales stream, so you have a lens which marries nicely for the extended coverage to FL = 55mm, whichever UWA lens you choose.

Additionally the difference between 20mm and 24mm is not so traumatic that you could not crop a bit off any image made at FL = 20mm, to mimic the FoV of a 24mm FL lens, if you did not want to change lenses use the 18 to 55.

However, the kicker is:

should you ever see a shot that you want to make with a 10mm Lens, that is impossible to achieve with a 14 mm lens – and – the difference between 14mm and 10mm is substantial.

Regarding to the bonus 40mm macro, please refer to my Post #29.

WW