If you dont mind MF why not try and find a used 15/5.6 AIS or even a samyang 14/2.8? I personally have a 28/2 AIS and a D5000 and its really not that hard to meter and with digital in 2 shots you can determine roughly what exposure you need.

I have the nikkor 10-24mm lens and it is a fine lens and I would recommend it. Take a look at it if you have not already done so....

bobster said:
Hi A,My first post, I have a D5000 I purchassed as I am going to Norway next year for the Northern lights, What wide lense would you say I would need being a newbie that works best with the D5000. my thanks for any input.

And, some thoughts... 20mm f/2.8 as suggested, or the 10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye which gives about 150° horizontal. Some of the other brands have some in between and maybe someone will post their experience with these.

Gabbb said:
Well that hasn't worked out. So I ordered a Samyang 14mm AE from ebay! It's a bit wider than what I originally wanted, but I'm really satisfied with the sharpness and overall image quality on DX! It's lightyears ahead of the Tokina sample I've tried.

Too bad, but maybe the Tokina was for sale because it was a bad copy? Good luck with the Samyang.

Gabbb said:
I bought a Tokina 12-24 second hand. Gonna arrive next week hopefuly. Decided not to wait for Nikon to release a 20ish prime and the extra wideness might come useful.

Well that hasn't worked out. So I ordered a Samyang 14mm AE from ebay! It's a bit wider than what I originally wanted, but I'm really satisfied with the sharpness and overall image quality on DX! It's lightyears ahead of the Tokina sample I've tried.

I bought a Tokina 12-24 second hand. Gonna arrive next week hopefuly. Decided not to wait for Nikon to release a 20ish prime and the extra wideness might come useful.

satellites said:
why has no one mentioned the nikkor 20mm f2.8 af-d? almost as wide as the 18-55 but sharper and faster....smaller as well!

A bit faster, yes, but not by much, no VR, not as wide, and much pricier. Perhaps a tad sharper, and with less distortion, but then again, not by much.

I have traded my general zoom for a set of primes. The 20mm f2.8 is my weakest. Yet, I do love it, it's a fun lens to shoot with. An update, even if it was just 20mm f2.8 would be most welcome.

I used to own mostly primes. My experience with Nikkor UW zooms though has made me rethink primes. I see not enough quality differences but the zooms save a lot of joking around and in some places there is no wiggle room at all. Give a zoom for my work.

The Nikkor 20mm f2.8 AF-D is the default lens mounted on my D200. I bought it second-hand in Japan in the mid-90s and it is still the business.

=============

I'm a senior member now? Wow!

Gabbb All i want to have something that's better than the kit lenses between 16 and 20mms at f8+ appertures.

if your body has an autofocus servo look into that 20mm nikkor. if not i'd consider the voigtlander since it is easier to manually focus with a manual focus lens.

Rx4Photo said:
It's all personal choice but in my opinion 20mm is not so wide on DX. What I consider wide on DX is in the range of 10-16ish.

i agree that it is not so wide...but he also said he was interested in a 24mm and the 20mm voigtlander, so it is relevent. also, anything under 35mm on dx is considered 'wide' but i'd agree to be 'ultrawide' it would need to be shorter than 16mm.

satellites said:
why has no one mentioned the nikkor 20mm f2.8 af-d? almost as wide as the 18-55 but sharper and faster....smaller as well!

It's all personal choice but in my opinion 20mm is not so wide on DX. What I consider wide on DX is in the range of 10-16ish.

why has no one mentioned the nikkor 20mm f2.8 af-d? almost as wide as the 18-55 but sharper and faster....smaller as well!

Speed is always nice, all I wanted/want is a mid-wide lens that is razor sharp worst case scenario stopped down to f8/11, if its sharp by F4 even better.
The Rumor is on this site, you just have to expand their d800 article...

I guess whatever you need...personally a really fast lens isn't that necessary in wide angle focal lengths. My 12-24 F4 has been fast enough for anything I have used it for even without a tripod. Plus Gabbb you kept saying you wanted to shoot it at F8...so why would it matter if it was fast or a kit lens or whatever...my 12-24 F4 can be shot at F8. I still think it isn't that wide on a DX. I actually don't think I ever shoot any photo in this range. Before I had my 12-24 my 18-200 was always at 18 for wide shots. Lastly there aren't any rumors that I know of for a 24 F1.8 lens.

I do like the thought of the F1.8G primes that they have been releasing...they perform well and are relatively cheap. Had they made them before I got most of my current stuff I would probably have a totally different kit. I would have gotten the 40 micro instead of my 35. I would have the 50 F1.8G. I might still get the 85 F1.8 if they release it next month.

Not to mention fast zooms are slow in comparison...

If it's around the same price as a 35mm 1.8, I'd bite. Hooked on fast lenses.

Fast zooms are way too expensive for me.

Gabbb said:
The Nikkor AF-S 24mm f/1.8G DX is close enough to what I want, realy hope the rumor comes true.

It would be OK, but on DX it isn't all that wide. Most zooms and kit lenses go to 17 or 18 mm.

The Nikkor AF-S 24mm f/1.8G DX is close enough to what I want, realy hope the rumor comes true.

TaoTeJared said:
Love this one! by the way.

Thanks!

swame_sp said:
Holy Moly!!!! Hand held? It's damn sharp man!!!!

You sold me on tokina 12-24 f/4, I was about to buy (tomorrow) 11-16 for $560 (new mint), which is about $200 more than 12-24 first version.

I have had fun with it. You lose 1 mm on the wide side and the F2.8, but you gain a more usable zoom range (12mm instead of 5). I let my friend use it while we were on a camping trip and I had to steal it away from him to get it back.

Gabbb said:
I dont need the 2,8. I just wanted to point out that they did make a wide angle 2,8 prime(250$) for the nikon 1 system that would have been perfect for me if it has been for dx. And about nikon deciding to go with zooms, they might have changed their initiative, just think about the recently released 40mm2,8dx lens and why give something to the "point and shoot ppl" that use nikon1 cameras, that is not available for dx...

Voigtlander for example has a 20mm prime for nikon for 500$-ish, maybe I'll check that out. All i want to have something that's better than the kit lenses between 16 and 20mms at f8+ appertures.

I don't even understand what you want. Why do you have to shoot at F8+? With the angle so wide pretty much everything is in focus even wide open. Also there are non-kit lenses in that range. Well pretty much every wide angle lens that is being made is better than the kit lenses in that range. So what do you need? There is a dedicated DX 10-24 F3.5-4.5 (this was my second choice). If you don't like that the 12-24 F4 is available...also good and you can stop it down to F8+. If you have money you can buy the 14-24 F2.8 which I heard is a great lens. Actually I haven't heard anything negative about the Nikon wide angle zooms. The two Tokina wide angle zooms are also highly praised. My copy is sharp and I would shoot it over my 18-200 at 18-24 mm.

tcole1983 said:
I didn't get the 11-16 because it doesn't have the built in motor. The F4 isn't really a problem. It has the same limitations as any other lens in low light...you would only gain 1 stop with the F2.8. Not a deal breaker...in either case you would need a tripod or higher ISO in low light.

If you are hesitant to get the 12-24 F4 I wouldn't be. Out of the pictures I have taken with it, only one came out blurry and I was being sloppy...the sun was going down and yeah...

There were both at night handheld.

Holy Moly!!!! Hand held? It's damn sharp man!!!!

You sold me on tokina 12-24 f/4, I was about to buy (tomorrow) 11-16 for $560 (new mint), which is about $200 more than 12-24 first version.

TaoTeJared said:
Nikon and every company has always made the 50 or 40mm and 50 DX equiv really cheap. Everything else has always been pricey. They are the easiest focal length to create for 35mm.

I'm not sure if I'm following you on this. So you think you need f2.8 or don't... lost me here. Almost all wide angles go to f22.

That is a smaller lens. Wide angle lenses especially cheap ones are not small by the nature of the optics. DX has been around for almost 10years- 7 of which were pro bodies and Nikon and others decided to go with zooms for this range long ago. It may be frustrating to hear, but that is what they seem to have decided.

There are a lot of great wide angle zooms out there from Tokina & Tamron that are cheap. In photography, Cheap lenses are anything around $500. Anything under that, are gifts from heaven.

I dont need the 2,8. I just wanted to point out that they did make a wide angle 2,8 prime(250$) for the nikon 1 system that would have been perfect for me if it has been for dx. And about nikon deciding to go with zooms, they might have changed their initiative, just think about the recently released 40mm2,8dx lens and why give something to the "point and shoot ppl" that use nikon1 cameras, that is not available for dx...

Voigtlander for example has a 20mm prime for nikon for 500$-ish, maybe I'll check that out. All i want to have something that's better than the kit lenses between 16 and 20mms at f8+ appertures.

tcole1983 said:

Love this one! by the way.

Gabbb said:
Well, The new 35mm and 50mm afs primes fit that well. The 10mm f/2.8 for Cx also...

Nikon and every company has always made the 50 or 40mm and 50 DX equiv really cheap. Everything else has always been pricey. They are the easiest focal length to create for 35mm.

"It's alright if I need to stop it down to f8 or even f11."

I'm not sure if I'm following you on this. So you think you need f2.8 or don't... lost me here. Almost all wide angles go to f22.

It being small is not the main objective here, but rather it not being larger than a 16-85vr.

That is a smaller lens. Wide angle lenses especially cheap ones are not small by the nature of the optics. DX has been around for almost 10years- 7 of which were pro bodies and Nikon and others decided to go with zooms for this range long ago. It may be frustrating to hear, but that is what they seem to have decided.

There are a lot of great wide angle zooms out there from Tokina & Tamron that are cheap. In photography, Cheap lenses are anything around $500. Anything under that, are gifts from heaven.