<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Nikon Rumors Forum &#187; Tag: ultrawide - Recent Posts</title>
		<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/tags.php?tag=ultrawide</link>
		<description>where there’s smoke there’s forum fire</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.1</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/rss.php?tag=ultrawide" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>TaoTeJared on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51861</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 17:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>TaoTeJared</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51861@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Full frame it should get a look.  </p>
<p>DX - I would pass.  I used it on my D300 and when I compared it to the Tokina 12-24 I sold it and bought the Tokina.  The Tokina is much better in every way.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>foto2021 on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51818</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:36:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>foto2021</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51818@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><blockquote><p><cite>freedom7 <a href="http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51664">said</a>:</cite><br />
Anyone know what the quality is like on the super wide Sigma 12-24?
</p></blockquote>
<p>It's a great lens for the money.  It covers full frame!</p>
<p>Wide open, it is sharp in the centre and soft at the edges.  It performs best stopped down to f/8-f/11, when it is sharp across the frame.  Contrast is good and it is surprisingly resistant to flare for such a wide angle of view.</p>
<p>Its particular strength is its lack of rectilinear distortion.  Effectively, there is none.  Sigma has made a remarkable job of correcting distortion that could reasonably be expected to be severe. </p>
<p>The weakness, as always, is Sigma's variable build quality.  If you get a good one, it's a fine lens.  If you get a bad one, it will probably fail just when you need it not to.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>freedom7 on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51671</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>freedom7</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51671@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Thanks FT<br />
Brother is giving me the lens so wondered what its limitations were.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drab on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51670</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:16:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Drab</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51670@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Yea, if you're talking full-frame it's worth a strong consideration.  I'd get it in a heartbeat if I didn't already have 14mm covered.  On crop sensors the Tokinas and Nikons are better (build and image quality) and cheaper and faster.</p>
<p>I'll admit being biased though.  The Tokina AT-X Pro series of lenses is the only third-party lenses I've ever been so impressed with.  I shot quite a bit with most the crop ultrawides before buying my 11-16, and while the Sigma 12-24 feels much better than the Sigma 10-20 (and seems to flare less) (and totally smokes the crapfest Tamron 11-18 (never tried the Tamron 10-24)) it still felt inferior.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Fried Toast on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51665</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Fried Toast</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51665@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>I don't mind it. It's not a particularly bright lens, but it'll get the job done. Haven't had any problems with it, but then again, I don't use it much. </p>
<p>This is the only example I have uploaded right now:<br />
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/4832384502/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/4832384502/</a></p>
<p>For UW on full-frame, it's hard to beat the price. If you don't need the f2.8, then it might be worth considering.
</p></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>freedom7 on "Anyone any experience with Sigma 12-24 D?"</title>
			<link>http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=3050#post-51664</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>freedom7</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">51664@http://nikonrumors.com/forum/</guid>
			<description><p>Anyone know what the quality is like on the super wide Sigma 12-24?
</p></description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
