- This topic is empty.
Wide angle lens aperture
-
Hi,
I am considering buying a wide angle lens for my D90. The two I am looking at are the tokina 11-16 2.8, and the sigma 10-20 4-5.6.
I am primarily buying it for landscape and cityscape shots. The sigma is about half the price as the tokina, likely due to the fast aperture on the tokina. My question is how important is it, or what difference would it give me for landscape type shots, to have the faster tokina, and is it worth the additional cost for what I want to do?
thanks.
Just ask yourself what aperture you’ll be using to take your photos.
Most landscape images would be f/16-f/22 so you seldom need a fast lens.
I have a wide angle lens, but I need f/2.8 since I use it for group photos under floodlights and stuff. When I use it for landscapes (in daylight), I would be shooting a lot more closed (f/16 usually).
what difference would it give me for landscape type shots, to have the faster tokina, and is it worth the additional cost for what I want to do?
Shooting a landscape scene at anything below f8 would result in too shallow a depth of field for it to be effective. For the most part, people will want their landscapes (or cityscapes for that matter) to be sharp and in focus from front to back. If you were to shoot at f2.8, only the area immediately in front of and behind your focus area would be sharp. Everything else would be nicely blurred (called Bokeh I think). But blurry landscapes rarely work :D. For the type of photography you’re talking about, you would nearly always use an aperture between f8 and f22. These apertures will result in slower shutter speed as well which is why tripods are essential for landscapes.
To answer your question – I personally would go for the cheaper Sigma in this case, provided it’s got decent reviews at least.markclehane wrote:
what difference would it give me for landscape type shots, to have the faster tokina, and is it worth the additional cost for what I want to do?
Shooting a landscape scene at anything below f8 would result in too shallow a depth of field for it to be effective. For the most part, people will want their landscapes (or cityscapes for that matter) to be sharp and in focus from front to back. If you were to shoot at f2.8, only the area immediately in front of and behind your focus area would be sharp. Everything else would be nicely blurred (called Bokeh I think). But blurry landscapes rarely work :D. For the type of photography you’re talking about, you would nearly always use an aperture between f8 and f22. These apertures will result in slower shutter speed as well which is why tripods are essential for landscapes.
To answer your question – I personally would go for the cheaper Sigma in this case, provided it’s got decent reviews at least.area immediately in front of and behind your focus area…
true but the area immediately in front of and behind a hyperfocal focus point at 10mm on a d90 is 26 metres at f1.8 and effectively infinite at f2.8….
tis one of the joys of superstar!!
Don’t overlook the Tokina 12-24 as it’s quite a bit cheaper and is still a great lens. The Tokina range is not that big but the quality is second to none. However I am biased as we sell them.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
