| Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF | |
|
|
|
Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras | 
| Brand: Nikon
Buy New: $809.00
as of 3/16/2010 16:55 CDT details
New (13) from $809.00
Rating:  14 reviews
Media: Electronics
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Batteries Included: No
Optical Zoom: 2.4
Maximum Focal Length: 24
Minimum Focal Length: 10
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 8.4 x 5.3 x 4.9
MPN: Nikkor 10-24mm
Model: Nikkor 10-24mm
UPC: 018208021819
EAN: 0018208021819
Availability: Usually ships in 3-4 business days
| |
| Features:
| • | Compact, 2.4x ultra wide-angle zoom | | • | Optical design optimized for use with Nikon DX-format digital cameras | | • | Exclusive Nikon Silent Wave Motor | | • | Two ED-(Extra-low Dispersion) glass elements; three aspherical lens elements | | • | Close focusing to 0.8 feet |
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
This ultra wide-angle lens, designed exclusively for use with Nikon's DX-format, provides a versatile wide-angle zoom perspective.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 14
 Excellent on DX and FX too May 22, 2009
Doctor.Generosity (Western Massachusetts)
59 out of 64 found this review helpful
Another work of Nikon lens genius which gives the ability to take dramatic, unusual, never-before-available, super-wide pix. As recently as a few years ago, before Nikon learned to mass produce aspheric elements, manufacturing this complex 14 element lens at reasonable cost would have been impossible. Compared to the earlier 12-24mm, significantly wider angle.
A nice suprise is that this DX lens can also be used FX, with some limitations of course. Although it will give the full zoom range only when used on the smaller DX format, it actually covers the frame of an FX camera - not over the full range but from 24mm down to about 18mm focal length, with acceptable vignetting (edge darkening). I am using it that way on my film Nikon F6 and digital D700. (For the D700, turn the DX Crop default OFF and turn the Vignette Control to HIGH.)
I disagree with the reviewers who complain about the plastic, Made in China construction. If this lens were made of brass and steel like a Leica, it would weigh twice as much, cost more, and be no better photographically. Is it more important to have the controls be smooth than to capture new kinds of photos? In my opinion Nikon has taken the right approach - state of the art computational design, innovative manufacturing of aspheric elements, good enough construction, and breakthrough capability affordable for the amateur photog.
Good WA range, nice weight, sharp June 18, 2009
Paula N., Deal (Cleveland, Ohio)
32 out of 36 found this review helpful
My husband purchased this lens from Amazon because of good service I received in the past. It is available from other online sources for slightly less. He reports that the lens arrived a day earlier than expected (thank you) and has been used for interior and exterior shots. On a d90, the built-in flash works from about 19 to 24 mm without lens shading. It focuses fast, balances well with the d90, and the pictures are sharp and have good contrast. At the 10 mm end, it gives great angle of view, with expected barrel distortion. Got sharper stopped down to f8. Distortion fades up to 15 mm and from there to 24 mm, it is a sharp lens for family and outdoor shots. This will be his main d90 lens. He was considering the Nikkor 12-24, but wanted the extra WA, considered the Tokina 11-16, but again wanted the extra WA and had concerns about availability and QC issues. Wishes there was more technical test data, but he needed a good WA lens now for upcoming vacations and is happy with this choice. Says Nikon has never failed him and Amazon was solid.
Very Solid, Very Light Weight, Expensive Wide Angle Zoom for DX May 12, 2009
D. Sasso
55 out of 67 found this review helpful
I got this lens the other day from Amazon and had a chance to play around with it a bit. The sharpness and the straightness in the corners, upon initial inspection, don't look to be any better then the 12-24mm Nikon DX wide angle. That was largely considered inferior in every way to the Tokina 11-16mm lens, which is hard to come by and seems to have some focus problems in certain production batches. This lens is quicker then the 12-24mm in certain situations, and will go 2mm wider for essentially the same price, so its a no brainer for people who want DX wide angle Nikon glass. The Tokina 11-16mm is more a pro style lens, its heavier and its faster then the two Nikon wide angle zoom lens. However, this new 10-24mm is much lighter, great for carrying around, and a perfect casual amateur wide angle lens. The only problem is the price; its essentially a pro price for an amateur quality piece of glass. So if you have the scratch and you want something you can carry around with you to shoot wide angle, buy it immediately. Its the pefect companion lens for the 18-200mm VR, and its built in exactly the same way. You can carry two lens and get 10-200mm in coverage. If you need pro wide angle DX glass, don't buy, and if you don't have 900 to burn on a lens, don't buy. I think Nikon must be thinking that an amateur won't have a problem buying a D5000 or D90 body, this lens and the 18-200mm lens and then calling it a day. They may be right, but in the current economy, i'm afraid then may not be.
Soft in the corners June 14, 2009
Groovy Geek (Portland, OR)
28 out of 33 found this review helpful
I have owned and shot with the Nikon 12-24, Tokina 12-24, and three copies of the Sigma 10-20. With the exception of one recent bad copy of the Sigma they were all notably better than the 10-24 in the corners. My copy of the 10-24 is nice in the center, but all four corners were uniformly degraded. Every other WA lens I have owned cleans up very fast in the corners at 10-12mm and by f/5.6 was nearly as good as f/11. Not so with 10-24, which is mushy in the corners at f/3.5 and improves only gradually as it is stopped down, with peak sharpness at a bit over f/11. At f/11 it mostly catches up with the third-party lenses mentioned above and Nikon's own 12-24. I have posted sample images on DPR, photo.net, [...], look them up to see what I am talking about.
The 10-24 range is ideal for my needs so it is a shame that the performance is not as good as the 12-24, even at 12-14mm. The MTF numbers would have suggested that it would be better. My copy is not. Since all four corners are nearly uniformly degraded I don't think that I have a lemon, it may be just inherent in the lens design. I am tempted to call it curvature of field, but with the extreme DOF at 10mm even at f/5.6 I am not sure this would be a reasonable explanation.
While not as terrible as the sample images I have seen from the Tamron 10-24mm, my copy of this lens would not seem to be as good with flat-field subjects (aka brick walls :-) as the other WA lenses I have owned. However, in real-life images with variable depth the corner softness is very difficult to see. Not sure if this is because of the possible field curvature mentioned above, or because it is very rare that I shoot something that has good detail all the way to the corners.
Overall I am a bit disappointed. Given the price it should have been unambiguously better than the competition. Not 2x better as other reviewers have suggested, I am prepared to pay a decent premium to Nikon just for the consistency of color rendition I would get between this and my other most used lens (70-200). However, my expectation was to be able to say "about the same as the Sigma 10-20 in most respects, better at X and Y". Right now I am not sure what X and Y would be, at least in comparison to the excellent copy of the Sigma 10-20 I used to have.
I will probably end up keeping the lens. The 10-24mm range is just too convenient for me, and there is no way I would consider replacing this with the Tamron 10-24, which is absolutely terrible in the corners at 10mm according to numerous reviews.
===========================
Update on 1/7
I need to amend the review. I am leaving the original text unchanged for reference purposes, so it is clear what I said earlier and how my views have evolved.
After using the lens for a few months I need to retract my "soft in the corners" assessment. Not sure how I came to this conclusion with the original tests, the softness was clearly there, but try as I might I cannot reproduce it now with careful focusing. My best guess is that I slightly mis-focused, AF can be unreliable on WA lenses. If you test it against a brick wall make sure to be square and use LiveView with manual focusing. With careful focusing the lens is at least as good as the Sigma 10-20 that I loved so much. Not corner-corner sharpness, that would be a small miracle at 10mm, but slightly better than anything I have seen from the competition. Overall the lens is still not a great value for the quality delivered, but if price is a secondary concern you will love the range and consistency of color rendition with your other Nikon lenses. If you want the absolute best bang for the buck go for the Sigma, just make sure you test it carefully, there are many documented instances of significant copy variation. The colors a slightly different, not better or worse, just different.
This one is the best. October 7, 2009
Douglas L. Hale (Houston USA)
13 out of 14 found this review helpful
I read everything I could about wide zooms FX and DX. For DX, this one is the best. I bought it for a photo safari to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada, and another to Big Bend National Park.
The Tokina may be a good lens, but the zoom range is very limited. At 11mm by 16mm the Nikon is at least as good plus you still have range to use. That makes the Nikkor a no brainer.
I just returned from a 8 day photo safari of the upper east coast of the USA, and Canada. I took over 800 photos most with this lens. As it turned out I was very happy I bought the Nikon 10-24mm, and did not choose the Tokina 11-16mm. The added range made all the difference.
Light Houses, harbor sunsets, ships at sea, city streets, building interiors, and lots more. This lens was on my D90, and a 18-200mm on my D40.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 14
|
|
|
CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. - | |
