AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED lens * 15-36mm effective focal length with APS-C sensor cameras * ideal for wide-angle shots of landscapes and scenery * lens construction: 14 elements in 9 groups * contains two ED (extra-low dispersion) lens elements for high resolution and contrast *Customer Review: Good WA range, nice weight, sharp
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.
Customer Review: Soft in the corners
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, nikongear.com, and photographyreview.com, 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.
Surround Sound Home Theater
