Sigma 8-16 f4.5 or Tokina 11-16 f2.8?

Is it worth going ultra wide at the expense of a slower lens? Anyone with experiences with these lens comment?

I have 2 lens 18-55mm kit lens and minolta 35-70mm fixed F4 lens.

Will it be a good idea to buy this : Tamron AF 28-200mm F3.8-5.6 XR Aspherical IF .

Tamron superzoom overlaps my current setup from 28-70, but gives me long range beyond 150mm.

I am a beginner, and dont know which order to buy lens or should i just save the money. I like zoom lens for going to park and zoo with kids but dont got money for F2.8 APO LD type of lens

I use sony alpha dslr

unless you NEED the speed of the Tokina, get the wider lens that's just as awesome.

the Sigma has the funky front bulging glass, right? does that bother you?

personally, i've utilized the speed of my Tokina many times.

Yeah. . don't do it.

If you got any questions call this dude



and just explain your situation. If you have warranty they will do everything they can to ensure its fixed for free (other than $10 shipping charge).

I used to have the Tokina 11-16mm for my D7000. While pretty awesome, I found it a bit too contrasty for my liking. It was pretty darn sharp though.

The 8-16mm is not bad, but if you read around, there's a little variation between copies.

It's definitely not in warranty - it was purchased a few years back in the UK, secondhand - and I dropped the lens onto the ground while it was mounted onto the body - so the mount has broken off (suprisingly the glass is still intact).

I called VanComp and I thought they'd be able to give me a quote straight up with any inspection fee (well, at least that's what the guy gave me the impression he was going to do), because I didn't want to pay a $50 inspection fee just to be told it would cost more than the value of the lens to repair. I basically just want to salvage some of the value then sell the lens.

It's a Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Macro - which I might be able to sell for $400 maybe?

I'll just swallow the cost and send it to Gentec. Thanks for the info!!

Wow I got the same lens with a broken aperture lol.


The guy said $95 fixing fee if you want them to fix it, otherwise $25 to look at it (plus $10 shipping). So a total of $35 if you want sigma to check it out. The $95 repair is pretty flat rate unless they run into a major cost/major broken part.

i emailed Kerrisdale Cameras telling them i'd like to buy an Canon MP-E 65mm from them. however, since they buy and sell used equipment, i told them i'd like to use my Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM macro as a trade in.

they offered me $200!

so i emailed them back and said that their MP-E 65mm is $100 more than Broadway Camera. so they said, ok, we'll give you $225-$250.

fuck, and fuck you KC.

Since they have to resell your lens of course they will lowball you on the trade in. They need to add profit on top and then sell it. I think you're better off on craigslist or bccamera forums.

dude, i know all that, i'm CL lens man! lenses hold their value really well, the opposite of cameras.

but c'mon, $225? its near $900 with tax, lol. here's whats going to happen. i will sell my Sigma, and i will not buy a lens from Kerrisdale. or, i will keep my Sigma, and still buy a MP-E 65 from somewhere else.

what's their profit on me now?

$225 is insulting. I think our last used Sigma 150mm macro sold for about $650 on consignment, but it didn't sell for about a year.

Kerrisdale - $1200
Broadway - $1100
Photo Expert - $950 <-- also usually willing to bargain closer to american prices (bhphoto)

^^^ excellent!

Anyone have any experience with Canon 50mm 1.4 and Sigma 50mm 1.4?
I'm deciding between the two but keep flipping back and forth. Is Sigma worth the extra $$?

bokeh from the Sigma is betterer(creamier and rounder).

For those of you looking into ultra-wides (such as myself) and are willing to wait a bit:

New Tokina 11-16 II DX PRO announced:


Tokina AT-X 11-16 f/2.8 PRO DX

Personally I think I'm sold on one of the 10-20/22 variants, but this looks quite intriguing. If this bumps the price of the original down far enough, I may pick that up instead.

I am also considering the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 or Sigma 8-16 f4.5. If this Tokina bumps the original 11-16 down, that might help me decide.

As much as I like the 8-16, the bulbous front end really puts me off. I know the Nikon UWA which is perfect in every way is as well, but the fact I can't put any filters on it directly is a dealbreaker for me.

The Tokina's sharpness is amazing I hear, but the difference between 10 and 11mm is significant enough imo, which is why I dropped it from consideration originally. If the original Tokina is around 600-650, I may just pick it up.

If only the Sigma wasn't bulbous :okay:

nothing exciting unless they improved on flare resistance. what kind of price cuts are you guys expecting to decide to pull the trigger?

$600 and below, done.

Memory Express had it for $650 a few months ago, if I recall correctly

ddr- I think they have some new coatings on them. Hopefully they help with the flare issue.

Anything around 600 and I'm sold- I've played around with both the Canon and Sigma UWAs, and the Canon is just too pricey, and the Sigma's sharpness is not up there with the others. But at $400 used it's hard to pass up for a UWA :badpokerface:

I'm starting to get into street photography a little more now. What would be a lens with better bokeh? Nikon 85mm 1.8 or 105mm? Which one will be a better bang for the buck?
Posted via RS Mobile

Nikon Telephoto AF DC Nikkor 105mm f/2.0D Lens 1932 B&H Photo

Great bokeh but probably hard to use for street since its so long.

oh Damn I didn't realize the 105mm was so expensive. How's the bokeh on the 85mm? I have a 70-200 2.8 but I don't want to lug it around everywhere :/ i just want a lens with a lot of bokeh cause I hate how you have to stand really close to the subject of you want some bokeh with the 50mm :/ the 35mm is great too but again with the lack of bokeh
Posted via RS Mobile

doesn't this depend on how far your background is? i've seen wonderful bokeh at all sorts of focal lengths. i'm not commenting on how close you have to be in relation to your subject, but maybe a depth of field calculator can put it into more perspective?