Lower than 18mm?
Discussion
For a Nikon, excepting fisheye what are the options?
I've seen 10-20 Sigmas and 12-24 Nikkors. I'm hardly going to set the world alight with my photography, and I dont want to be spending mega money
Anything I havent thought about thats sensible money? Speed isnt a massive issue as I can always use a tripod and it'll be landscape stuff that shouldnt be moving really
ETA - I'm not averse to a half decent compact if such a thing exists
I've seen 10-20 Sigmas and 12-24 Nikkors. I'm hardly going to set the world alight with my photography, and I dont want to be spending mega money
Anything I havent thought about thats sensible money? Speed isnt a massive issue as I can always use a tripod and it'll be landscape stuff that shouldnt be moving really
ETA - I'm not averse to a half decent compact if such a thing exists
Edited by andyquantum on Tuesday 21st October 11:52
I've used the Sigma 10-20 a lot and whilst it isn't fast and it can distort somewhat, the results on landscapes are just way out of proportion with the price. Pixel peepers will point out quite rightly that it's a little soft too but it genuinely captures images that you could not get any other way and that I believe makes it a unique bargain. It does incredible things to skies too.

dumbfunk

dumbfunk
This might seem a tad naff, but have you considered a Jessops Semi-Fisheye 0.42X Lens adaptor?........at a fraction of the cost and comes complete with macro adaptor, don't laugh - it's not a bad piece of kit.
Works for me on the odd accasion that I need to be looking in all directions at the same time.
Works for me on the odd accasion that I need to be looking in all directions at the same time.
Stickers said:
This might seem a tad naff, but have you considered a Jessops Semi-Fisheye 0.42X Lens adaptor?
That kind of thing would certainly be the cheapest option but will be far worse edgewise than a dedicated ultrawide. But if you shoot for fun and aren't too bothered about perfection, it could be the best answer for you.I had one which was not only a 0.4x wide angle adaptor but you could unscrew the front and get a close-up lens too.
andyquantum said:
For a Nikon, excepting fisheye what are the options?
For a digital sensor I'd caution AGAINST a 14mm Sigma HSM - tried it, flared like hell as you'd expect, but apart from that the quality wasn't great, even though it can be had cheap-ish. I don't think that the 14mm Nikkor is so hot on a digital sensor, either - and that's shed loads. The 16mm Nikkor? 
Now, I know, I know, I know that you said excepting fisheye. But it is a wonderful lens for the money. And can be had new or secondhand for reasonable amounts. It is useful for shots like this:

Otherwise there are only two Nikkor choices, 12-24 or 14-24 lenses, that are really good. I know little about the non-Nikkors, apart from my experience with the Sigma.
I use the Sigma 10-20 all the time, it's incredibly versatile and I love mine to bits, I'd heartily recommend it.
Check out the flickr group for some good, and not so good examples of the lens in action.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/
edit - it's good fun up close too:

Check out the flickr group for some good, and not so good examples of the lens in action.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/
edit - it's good fun up close too:

Edited by _dobbo_ on Tuesday 21st October 13:59
I think it was dobbo's pier shots that got me looking into what the lens can do, I've been taking some local area type shots recently, and things such as lakes, bridges and seting something up for fireworks should look pretty decent with that type of lens
And I'm sure I'll find plenty of other uses for it post seasonality
And I'm sure I'll find plenty of other uses for it post seasonality
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff







