Sigma 1224mm F4 Dg Hsm Art Lens Vs Tokina 1628mm F28 Pro Fx
Sigma 12-24mm f/four.5-five.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
How-do-you-do anybody...have you lot ever owned or tried both these lenses?
Sigma 12-24mm f/4.v-5.half-dozen AF 2 DG HSM vs Tokina sixteen-28mm f/two.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
I accept a Nikon D800E and I'm keen to utilize an ultra broad bending lens for my holidays. I used to accept the Nikon 14-24 simply sold it sometime agone when I inverse over to Sony A7R. I'one thousand back to Nikon over again and this fourth dimension round...I'one thousand looking for an culling UWA lens.
Previously...although I had the Nikon 14-24...I hardly used it except when on holidays and etc so this fourth dimension round, no indicate spending a lot of money on a lens I will inappreciably use.
That said...I am looking for an culling that has exceptional performance especially when handheld and in a low calorie-free condition. And then when I do need to apply it...Information technology has to be great likewise.
I'm but wondering, from your experience...how do these lenses fare when handheld and in low low-cal conditions (eg. Taking photos inside Cathedrals, Castles, at night.
Cheers very much in accelerate for your suggest and assistance.
By the manner, this is non limited to Nikon mount...if yous use other systems such every bit Canon, Sony and Pentax and have used these 2 lenses in your total frame photographic camera equivalent...I would appreciate your feedbacks every bit well.
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/two.8D Tamron xviii-400mm F3.five-vi.3
freddyNZ • Senior Member • Posts: two,611
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-five.half-dozen AF II DG HSM vs Tokina sixteen-28mm f/two.viii AT-Ten Pro (IF) FX Lens
DrFongD800E wrote:
That said...I am looking for an alternative that has infrequent operation particularly when handheld and in a low low-cal condition. And so when I practice need to apply it...It has to be great too.
I'1000 simply wondering, from your experience...how do these lenses fare when handheld and in low light conditions (eg. Taking photos inside Cathedrals, Castles, at night.
The Sigma 12-24 certainly has infrequent performance - there'southward no wider rectilinear lens, and I've seen some remarkable results. But optical performance at 12mm doesn't compare with the xiv-24, with lots of distortion, soft edges broad, field curvature. Looking on the bright side, nobody makes a meliorate 12-Twenty FX zoom.
Given your second comment above, for manus held interiors, and if yous've decided that 16mm is wide plenty, then why not the sixteen-35 f4 VR? If VR has a use at these focal lengths, and then shooting interiors hand-held where camera milkshake is an issue - but move mistiness isn't, information technology seems to be fabricated for the job - the addition of VR possibly or even probably more use than the extra stop with the Tokina. The 16-35 will also take a normal threaded filter.
Using CaptureNX, baloney with the Nikkors can be corrected easily in PP, or if the lens profiles are loaded into the photographic camera and enabled, and then review in the LCD of raw files will evidence the distortion-corrected version.
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.v-5.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina xvi-28mm f/ii.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
freddyNZ wrote:
DrFongD800E wrote:
That said...I am looking for an alternative that has infrequent operation especially when handheld and in a low light condition. And so when I do need to use it...It has to be great too.
I'yard just wondering, from your experience...how exercise these lenses fare when handheld and in depression light conditions (eg. Taking photos inside Cathedrals, Castles, at night.
The Sigma 12-24 certainly has exceptional operation - there'south no wider rectilinear lens, and I've seen some remarkable results. But optical functioning at 12mm doesn't compare with the 14-24, with lots of baloney, soft edges broad, field curvature. Looking on the bright side, nobody makes a better 12-20 FX zoom.
Given your second comment above, for hand held interiors, and if you've decided that 16mm is wide enough, then why not the 16-35 f4 VR? If VR has a use at these focal lengths, so shooting interiors hand-held where photographic camera shake is an upshot - just move blur isn't, information technology seems to be made for the job - the addition of VR possibly or even probably more than utilize than the extra stop with the Tokina. The 16-35 will also have a normal threaded filter.
Using CaptureNX, distortion with the Nikkors can exist corrected easily in PP, or if the lens profiles are loaded into the photographic camera and enabled, and then review in the LCD of raw files will show the distortion-corrected version.
Howdy Freddy...swell to see some other fellow ANZAC. How are you? Thank you for your feedback. I've not had a chance to try out the 16-35mm but that is truly worth the thought.
In your opinion...if you had to decide between merely the Sigma and Tokina...what would you lot recommend? Thank y'all.
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Tamron 18-400mm F3.v-6.3
freddyNZ • Senior Member • Posts: 2,611
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.v-v.six AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.viii AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
DrFongD800E wrote:
Hello Freddy...neat to run across some other young man ANZAC. How are you? Give thanks you for your feedback. I've not had a chance to endeavour out the 16-35mm but that is truly worth the idea.
In your opinion...if you had to determine between only the Sigma and Tokina...what would y'all recommend? Cheers.
I'grand good cheers - are yous working in Indonesia?
It'due south a difficult call between the 2 lenses - every bit they are very different - not the to the lowest degree of it being that 12mm is really much wider than 16mm. But if you had a 14-24 and constitute that you didn't utilize it much, so why? If too wide, then definitely non the Sigma, if too heavy, and then perchance the Tokina - although information technology still weighs about 1kg.
I've tried the 14-24 and sixteen-28 on D800 bodies, I don't retrieve optical performance would be an issue with either - merely it really might be with the 12-24 - depending on your expectations. I've tried the 12-24, only only on DX format where it's a pointless lens with far better DX alternatives - simply on FX, there are no alternatives.
If weight is the issue, then information technology all gets back to the Nikkor sixteen-35 VR. I advise you try one out. I don't want one (very happy with xviii-35G on a D800E for my needs at the moment) but it could be the best selection for you.
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/four.5-v.6 AF Ii DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
freddyNZ wrote:
DrFongD800E wrote:
Hello Freddy...great to see some other fellow ANZAC. How are you? Thank you for your feedback. I've non had a chance to try out the 16-35mm just that is truly worth the thought.
In your opinion...if you had to make up one's mind between just the Sigma and Tokina...what would you recommend? Thank you.
I'm practiced thanks - are you working in Indonesia?
Information technology's a hard call betwixt the ii lenses - as they are very dissimilar - not the least of information technology beingness that 12mm is actually much wider than 16mm. Just if you had a 14-24 and found that you didn't use information technology much, so why? If too broad, then definitely not the Sigma, if also heavy, then mayhap the Tokina - although information technology still weighs about 1kg.
I've tried the xiv-24 and 16-28 on D800 bodies, I don't think optical operation would be an result with either - but information technology really might be with the 12-24 - depending on your expectations. I've tried the 12-24, but only on DX format where it's a pointless lens with far better DX alternatives - but on FX, there are no alternatives.
If weight is the result, then it all gets dorsum to the Nikkor 16-35 VR. I propose you try one out. I don't want one (very happy with 18-35G on a D800E for my needs at the moment) but it could be the best choice for you.
Thanks Freddy. Yes...I'm originally from Sydney and working in Indonesia now.
I'chiliad enticed by the Sigma's ability to go up to 12mm only the f/four.v-five.half-dozen office is what puts me off. I am worried that when the time comes and I desire to apply information technology handheld in a night setting...it would be then deadening and the images would be blurred by the slow speed and poor handheld techniques.
The Tokina f/2.viii gives me some comfort merely then again...I wish there was a 12-24mm f/2.eight but we tin only dream.
I looked at the 16-35mm reviews and it seems super sharp. I had a 70-200mm f/4 before and in the nighttime...it struggled and so that put me on the edge with the xvi-35mm f/4.
I so read other reviews proverb that although the Sigma is f/iv.5-5.6, it has new FLD lenses which enhances light gathering so and so again...I wonder how true this is and hoping to get anyone's kickoff hand experience and feedback.
Give thanks you over again for your super quick reply Freddy.
Fujifilm Ten-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/two.8D Tamron xviii-400mm F3.5-6.3
freddyNZ • Senior Fellow member • Posts: 2,611
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-five.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
DrFongD800E wrote:
, information technology has new FLD lenses which enhances light gathering so then once more...I wonder how true this is and hoping to go anyone'south showtime hand experience and feedback.
"FLD" or other acronyms used by other makers describes extra low-dispersion glass used to correct chromatic aberration - non "light transmission" through the lens.
Using the Sigma lens wide open up is likely to accentuate the optical flaws (field curvature) at the 12mm end - fifty-fifty stopped downwards intendance would be needed if yous desire sharp across the frame. Just needing sharp across the frame depends on composition. Needing no distortion is similar, it depends on composition, often bad distortion doesn't affair. But sometimes it will matter. And then that'southward what I was proverb earlier, if you desire 12mm, then in that location are compromises to be made.
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-10 Pro
I just bought this lens. My first results, mostly shot at f2.eight ddo expect promising, I retrieve.
http://fotoxbr.nl/weblog/2014/12/first-tokina-16-28mm-f2-eight-shots
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-Ten Pro (IF) FX Lens
Thanks for the replies and then far everyone...I'chiliad learning a lot from yous guys.
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/ii.8D Tamron 18-400mm F3.v-6.three
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/four.5-5.half dozen AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.viii AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
1
Bram de Mooij wrote:
Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-Ten Pro
I just bought this lens. My first results, mostly shot at f2.8 ddo await promising, I think.
http://fotoxbr.nl/weblog/2014/12/start-tokina-xvi-28mm-f2-viii-shots
Hi thanks for the link...cute photos. The brightness and sharpness is fantastic.
Have any of you tried taking photos at night with the Sigma?
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Tamron 18-400mm F3.five-6.3
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-five.6 AF Two DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/ii.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
Deplorable, I do not accept experience with that Sigma lens.
vepar • Regular Member • Posts: 221
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 AF II DG HSM vs Tokina xvi-28mm f/two.eight AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
one
DrFongD800E wrote:
Hi everyone...accept you ever owned or tried both these lenses?
I ain Sigma 12-24 mark I, it is I believe rather like mark II, 1 is little scrap sharper in center and other one in corners, marker I has less distortion, but at that place aren't whatsoever revolutionary differences. Don't own Tokina 16-28 but investigated it and saw lot of samples.
Sigma 12-24mm f/four.5-5.half-dozen AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
I accept a Nikon D800E and I'm bang-up to use an ultra wide bending lens for my holidays. I used to have the Nikon 14-24 just sold information technology sometime ago when I changed over to Sony A7R. I'm back to Nikon again and this time round...I'g looking for an alternative UWA lens.
Previously...although I had the Nikon 14-24...I hardly used it except when on holidays and etc so this time circular, no point spending a lot of money on a lens I will inappreciably use.
That said...I am looking for an culling that has infrequent operation especially when handheld and in a low light condition. So when I do need to employ it...It has to be great too.
Well, than Sigma 12-24 about certainly is non the lens y'all're looking for. Information technology is irksome lens 4.5-5.6 and you'll need to stop it further to get "decent" performance on d800e, certainly not exceptional functioning. Only aspect where Sigma 12-24 (mark i) really shines is baloney correction.
For that matter, Tokina should exist meliorate choice. Based on samples I saw it is pretty nice lens, comparable to Nikkor fourteen-24 (but I think nikkor should be amend)
I'k too in marketplace for UWA for my d800, and struggling. On these hi-res sensor seems UWA lenses nearly e'er show some compromises, and user must deal with it - nikkor 14-24 and tokina sixteen-28 are pain with filters, zeiss distagon 21mm vignettes and has mustache baloney, sixteen-35 has awful baloney at wide stop, sigma is tiresome and non sharp, etc.
I recollect, infrequent performance, handheld in low light on d800e in UWA range is too much to ask for.
I'm but wondering, from your experience...how practice these lenses fare when handheld and in depression light conditions (eg. Taking photos inside Cathedrals, Castles, at dark.
For that matter, I saw many depression light samples taken with Tokina xvi-28, which showroom weird rainbow like flare/ghosting around light sources inside of frame, so this could potentially be a bargain breaker for your intended purpose.
Thank you very much in advance for your propose and help.
Besides, good bang for the cadet solution could be Samyang 14mm.
By the style, this is non express to Nikon mount...if you use other systems such asto Canon, Sony and Pentax and have used these 2 lenses in your total frame camera equivalent...I would appreciate your feedbacks as well.
Fujifilm FinePix E900 Zoom Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-South Nikkor 85mm F1.4G Tokina AT-X sixteen-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +13 more
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/four.v-five.six AF Two DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/ii.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
"For that matter, I saw many low light samples taken with Tokina 16-28, which exhibit weird rainbow similar flare/ghosting around light sources inside of frame, and so this could potentially be a deal breaker for your intended purpose."
I tin can confirm that. Not a deal breaker for me, simply information technology is at that place and tin be problematic sometimes.
http://fotoxbr.nl
BasilG • Veteran Fellow member • Posts: 9,574
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-v.six AF Ii DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.eight AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
vepar wrote:
That said...I am looking for an alternative that has exceptional operation especially when handheld and in a low calorie-free condition. So when I do need to use it...It has to be great too.
I think, exceptional functioning, handheld in low light on d800e in UWA range is besides much to inquire for.
I'd call up that for handheld shooting in low light ("inside cathedrals and castles at night"), lens operation doesn't matter all that much, because at that place will be image quality bug due to (i) loftier ISO, (ii) camera shake, and (iii) shallow DoF... not a very popular statement maybe, only sometimes, you have to realize that technique can exist limiting as much as lens functioning (or lack thereof).
vepar • Regular Member • Posts: 221
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.half dozen AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/ii.8 AT-10 Pro (IF) FX Lens
BasilG wrote:
vepar wrote:
That said...I am looking for an culling that has infrequent functioning especially when handheld and in a depression low-cal condition. So when I practise need to use it...It has to be neat too.
I recall, exceptional performance, handheld in low light on d800e in UWA range is too much to enquire for.
I'd think that for handheld shooting in low low-cal ("inside cathedrals and castles at night"), lens functioning doesn't matter all that much, because there will be image quality issues due to (i) loftier ISO, (two) camera shake, and (3) shallow DoF... not a very pop statement perchance, just sometimes, you accept to realize that technique can be limiting equally much as lens performance (or lack thereof).
Yes, exceptional operation (what d800e sensor is capable of) handheld in low light is not piece of cake or even impossible to achieve. Sure, you lot're right, in these conditions there are other factors you lot stated which deteriorate IQ. Information technology is more than prudent to use tripod and less performing lens than to use best drinking glass on the market handheld. But even with tripod and lesser lens such as Sigma 12-24 operation volition not be exceptional on d800e. Maybe, if shoot raw on depression iso, from tripod, @f11, thoroughly sharpened and corrected in dxo and cropped to i.2 - outcome could exist close to exceptional. Only with nikkor xiv-24 or distagon 21mm and same workflow it volition be much amend for sure.
Simply if handheld utilise is mandatory, I'd much rather utilise nikkor 14-24 or something in the aforementioned league wide open @2.eight with finish or two lower iso- it will get you somewhere, than to utilize sigma 12-24 broad open @four.five-5.half dozen - information technology will get you nowhere. If you lot didn't use sigma 12-24, maybe it is hard for you to believe how bad and mushy sides and corners can exist taken with it wide open.
Fujifilm FinePix E900 Zoom Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.4G Tokina AT-X xvi-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +xiii more
jtra • Contributing Fellow member • Posts: 966
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-v.six AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-10 Pro (IF) FX Lens
1
Bram de Mooij wrote:
Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro
I merely bought this lens. My showtime results, mostly shot at f2.8 ddo await promising, I call back.
http://fotoxbr.nl/blog/2014/12/first-tokina-16-28mm-f2-8-shots
Nice pictures. This lens gets super abrupt at f/5.6 co-ordinate to charts I accept seen here.
However it has one important consequence for which I rather bought eighteen-35G (I was not interested in Sigma 12-24 as I wanted long end to be close to 35mm, which I found applied in my DX days on Nikon 10-24).
The result is rainbow flare effectually highlights. Information technology is visible in your last two pictures.
It is visible but when at that place very bright lights in the picture, and so for daylight mural in that location is no result, but at night with lights in the motion picture in that location volition be some problems.
Various samples from the internet that show it:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3379998#forum-post-50812877
http://s91.photobucket.com/user/crabball/media/Photos%20for%20comments%20and%20sharing/Tokina%2016%20to%2028mm%20FX%20Pro%20Lens%20Test/403cc490.jpg.html
http://worldbyjan.com/tag/tokina-16-28/
http://i.imgur.com/VNeyNxH.jpg
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.five-5.vi AF Two DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/ii.8 AT-10 Pro (IF) FX Lens
Yous are right most the rainbow like flare. I gauge I can live with that. It is visible once more in the last i in this series mostly shot with the Tokina.
http://fotoxbr.nl/blog/2014/12/monschau-weihnachts-markt
Luckily my new compact the LX100 gives me better results in this respect:
http://fotoxbr.nl/gallery/h1c80bcc7#h2e0bf7d6
http://fotoxbr.nl/gallery/h1c80bcc7#h1c80bcc7
Of course this has no ultra broad possibilities.
I will practice some night shot experiments with my original Nikon lenses (more often than not primes)
http://fotoxbr.nl
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-five.6 AF 2 DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.viii AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
Thank you everyone for the links and corking images. I tried the Tokina...it was nifty. Now to find a shop somewhere where they'll permit me try out the Sigma.
The low light images of the Sigma were stunning. The speed of the Sigma is what is holding me back but the focal length of 12mm really is enticing.
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Tamron 18-400mm F3.5-6.3
johnchap2 • Senior Member • Posts: 1,379
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.five-5.six AF Two DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
I bought and continue to own and use the commencement version of the Sigma 12-24mm. Despite the derogatory comments of some users users of this lens I accept found it quite satisfactory in the center and the corners. And I have used information technology mitt held in cathedrals across Europe, and temples in India and SE Asia. But this upshot will continue to decrease as the newer cameras can handle much higher ISOs without the noise level soaring into unacceptabily. The new D750 is a case in point.
There are ever ways to brace a mitt held photographic camera, but there is no substitute for coverage, as in wide angle coverage. 12mm is noticeably wider than 14mm. Aye, sometimes ane can step dorsum to get the scene coverage one is looking for, just one cannot always step back without falling over the cliff or into the river, or having things in the foreground now getting into the photograph.
I too ain the Sigma 8-14mm dx lens for apply on DX bodies. And I recently bought a used Nikon fourteen-24mm considering there are times when I merely must take faster glass, albeit far heavier drinking glass.
If you want true broad angle capability and so you accept 2 FX choices -- the 14-24 or the Sigma 12-24; and one DX option with the Sigma eight-16mm.
Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/ii.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-v.6G IF-ED VR +18 more
Thank you for your comments and advice. I had the 14-24 before. Beautiful lens. I am curiously after the 12-24 due to its wide angle capabilities.
I finally establish a camera shop that allows unboxing just none of the camera shops here volition allow y'all to mount it on your camera to do test shots. Argh.
I was hoping to at least mount the lens and look for a poorly lit room and take a few shots simply there was no way that was possible.
Thank goodness there is a platform like this where I tin enquire all of you for your experience.
Now I have another dilemma...has anyone ever tried a 70-200mm f/4 in poorly lit environment? The new Tokina 70-200mm f/4 here is currently on auction...I recently sold my Nikon VR2 and Tamron VC version as someone wanted information technology badly.
Now I am without a 70-200mm. But curious with how the f4 holds up and what is the bokeh similar?
Fujifilm X-T3 Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Tamron eighteen-400mm F3.5-vi.3
vepar • Regular Member • Posts: 221
Re: Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.half dozen AF II DG HSM vs Tokina 16-28mm f/ii.8 AT-X Pro (IF) FX Lens
johnchap2 wrote:
I bought and go along to own and use the start version of the Sigma 12-24mm. Despite the derogatory comments of some users users of this lens
I estimate that'southward me
I accept found information technology quite satisfactory in the center and the corners.
It is either you accept to low expectations, either I have to high expectations, or you have better copy than me.
However, my re-create is better across the frame on wide end than on "tele" end, but no matter what I do @ 12mm there will always exist in extreme corners (some sort of triangular) mush that can't be fixed but only cropped to equivalent of cca 14mm. On "tele" end farthermost corners are non mushy whatever more, simply whole frame except the eye is not really sharp - this tin be more or less fixed.
I don't speak derogatory about the lens, it paid it cocky numerous times for me and it a fine tool that brings staff of life to my table. I'm merely saying that I can non with calm in my mind recommend it to OP for his intended purpose. I use it for smaller interiors on tripod and/or couple of speedligths - and for that I highly recommend it - after all it is I believe all-time corrected UWA for distortion. But I tin't recommend information technology for handheld low light use: 1) corners suffer wide open 2) it is already irksome broad open up iii) because of its vignetting and the need to be used at higher iso (because it is wearisome) to correct for vignetting corners sometimes need to be pushed more two stops and this tin cause evident noise even on newer cameras.
And I have used it paw held in cathedrals beyond Europe, and temples in India and SE Asia. But this issue volition keep to subtract as the newer cameras tin can handle much higher ISOs without the noise level soaring into unacceptabily. The new D750 is a example in point.
There are always ways to brace a hand held camera, but there is no substitute for coverage, as in wide bending coverage. 12mm is noticeably wider than 14mm.
Completely agree.
Yes, sometimes ane can stride back to get the scene coverage one is looking for, but ane cannot always step back without falling over the cliff or into the river, or having things in the foreground at present getting into the photo.
I also ain the Sigma viii-14mm dx lens for employ on DX bodies. And I recently bought a used Nikon fourteen-24mm because there are times when I simply must have faster glass, albeit far heavier glass.
If you desire true wide angle capability and so you accept ii FX choices -- the xiv-24 or the Sigma 12-24; and one DX option with the Sigma eight-16mm.
Fujifilm FinePix E900 Zoom Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.4G Tokina AT-10 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX +13 more
Source: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3762963
0 Response to "Sigma 1224mm F4 Dg Hsm Art Lens Vs Tokina 1628mm F28 Pro Fx"
Post a Comment