Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 20 Dec 2013 (Friday) 03:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 16-20 f/2.0 DG Art for FF!

 
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,731 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 295
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Jan 09, 2014 15:10 |  #16

The Tokina was made for crop cameras and starts at an effective 17-18mm full frame equivalent... zoom ratio, after 1.6 factor is approximately 30%.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Ginga
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Jokkmokk - Sweden
     
Jan 09, 2014 23:41 |  #17

jrbdmb wrote in post #16591458 (external link)
I personally would rather see a smaller / cheaper / sharper 16mm prime than a zoom with such a small range of focal lengths.

There are already so many UWA primes to choose from, but when it comes to sharp UWA-zoom lens, Nikon is the only one who truly delivers.

The 17-40L and 16-35L II is crap, in terms of corner sharpness.


Sony A7R * 70-200 2.8L II * 24-70L II * Samyang 14
Recently sold: 5DIII * Sigma 35 *

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canon_Lover
Goldmember
Avatar
2,695 posts
Likes: 102
Joined Jan 2011
Location: WA
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:46 |  #18

Ginga wrote in post #16592998 (external link)
There are already so many UWA primes to choose from, but when it comes to lower distortion UWA-zoom lens, Canon is the only one who truly delivers.

The Nikon 16-35 and 14-24, are crap in terms of barrel distortion.

There I fixed that for you... :lol:

The 14-24 has an advantage in corner sharpness wide open, but not much stopped down. The Nikon 16-35 and 17-35 are abysmal for corner sharpness.


My 500PX (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
brettjrob
Dr. Goodness PHD
Avatar
470 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Norman, OK USA
     
Jan 10, 2014 16:35 |  #19

Canon_Lover wrote in post #16594822 (external link)
There I fixed that for you... :lol:

The 14-24 has an advantage in corner sharpness wide open, but not much stopped down. The Nikon 16-35 and 17-35 are abysmal for corner sharpness.

Even if your "fix" is completely true, who in the world would choose low distortion over corner sharpness? One is automatically corrected by any modern RAW converter, while the other is uncorrectable.

If this rumored 16-20 f/2 is a reality, I'll be interested as a full-frame user. It wouldn't take much to make it the sharpest UWA zoom for Canon users.

FWIW, I'm now on Nikon and while I haven't tried the 16-35 or 17-35 yet, the 18-35G is far sharper in the corners than my 17-40L was. Samples I've seen indicate that the 16-35 also has an edge over either Canon option, even if it's still weak in the extreme corners. The 14-24 absolutely dominates both Canon lenses, even stopped down.

Nathan wrote in post #16591779 (external link)
The Tokina was made for crop cameras and starts at an effective 17-18mm full frame equivalent... zoom ratio, after 1.6 factor is approximately 30%.

Yeah. A full-frame 16-20 would be relatively similar in concept to the Tokina 11-16 for crop, if a bit more narrow in zoom range.


Nikon D610, D5100
Samyang 14/2.8 | Nikon 18-35G, 24-85G VR, 70-200/4G VR

Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | skyinmotion.com (external link)
Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jan 10, 2014 16:47 |  #20

Nathan wrote in post #16591779 (external link)
The Tokina was made for crop cameras and starts at an effective 17-18mm full frame equivalent... zoom ratio, after 1.6 factor is approximately 30%.

Ratios stay the same regardless of crop factor and either way, it is a 1.45x (45% change in focal length) zoom.

brettjrob wrote in post #16594964 (external link)
Yeah. A full-frame 16-20 would be relatively similar in concept to the Tokina 11-16 for crop, if a bit more narrow in zoom range.

It's quite a bit smaller zoom range. Tokina is like 17-26mm in FF terms. 26mm is farther from 20mm than it sounds. If they could have at least gone to 24mm it would seem a lot more useful. As is, I still say they may as well have made an ~18mm prime.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,731 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 295
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Jan 10, 2014 16:56 |  #21

Modification above: When I typed 17-18mm, I meant that the wide end on the Tokina starts somewhere between 17mm and 18mm. As pointed out by tkb, the full equivalent range is 17-26mm in FF terms.

That said, how do you calculate zoom ratio anyway?


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jan 10, 2014 17:17 |  #22

Nathan wrote in post #16595007 (external link)
Modification above: When I typed 17-18mm, I meant that the wide end on the Tokina starts somewhere between 17mm and 18mm. As pointed out by tkb, the full equivalent range is 17-26mm in FF terms.

That said, how do you calculate zoom ratio anyway?

just divide the two ends. 16/11 = 1.45

For a 70-200 that 200/70 = 2.9


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick3434
Goldmember
Avatar
1,568 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 211
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Trespassing in South Florida
     
Jan 11, 2014 11:43 |  #23

Am I the only one that thinks that 16-20 is a BIG 4mm? I mean I would guess most would have it at 16 90% of the time, but still.

That said, I would rather see a 16 prime at 2 or even 1.8 if possible, but If it optically performs like a prime because of the short zoom then they are basically delivering...if this even comes out....


Everything is relative.
Gear: 6D, Unholy Trinity:twisted: (24Lii, sigma 50A, 135L), and for the other ends of the spectrum, sigmaEX 14mm2.8 and sigmaEX 100-300F4.
Fuji X-e2, Rokinon 8 2.8 Fisheye II, Fuji 14 2.8, Fuji 18-55, Fuji 23 1.4
FlikR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,731 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 295
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Jan 11, 2014 21:50 |  #24

tkbslc wrote in post #16595053 (external link)
just divide the two ends. 16/11 = 1.45

So my math was wrong and I didn't understand how to take the ratio.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,170 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma 16-20 f/2.0 DG Art for FF!
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Gianpaolo
871 guests, 340 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.