Options
Advantages to Gold-Ring Nikkor 12-24?
I am ready to purchase my fist ultrawide zoom lens. On the advice of a friend, I ordered a refurbished Nikkor 10-24mm DX for $699. Almost immediately, I started having an intense case of buyers remorse 
Why? Because I started to read a lot of negative comments on dgrin/dpreview about variable-aperture lenses. I did take a look at the Nikkor 12-24mm DX, but dismissed it because "Why would I pay twice as much for 2mm less on the wide end? I mean, I am buying an ULTRAwide lens, right?"
I still have the option to return the lens for a refund, and wanted to hear your guys opinions. What advantages does the 12-24mm have over the 10-24mm ... besides that beautiful Gold Ring?
Why? Because I started to read a lot of negative comments on dgrin/dpreview about variable-aperture lenses. I did take a look at the Nikkor 12-24mm DX, but dismissed it because "Why would I pay twice as much for 2mm less on the wide end? I mean, I am buying an ULTRAwide lens, right?"
I still have the option to return the lens for a refund, and wanted to hear your guys opinions. What advantages does the 12-24mm have over the 10-24mm ... besides that beautiful Gold Ring?
0
Comments
The Nikkor 10-24 is on the left. The 12-24 is on the right.
I've had great experiences with some variable-aperture lenses (specifically Olympus's) so I don't think there is a specific issue with a lens being variable VS fixed aperture. That being said there is a reason that impression is out there since for the most part variable aperture lenses are lower end/lower quality in general beyond simply their aperture.
I don't have experience with that specific lens, though if you do end up wanting to return the 10-24 I'd also look into the Tokina 12-24 F4 ("II" model if you have a body without a built in focus motor) for 300-400 used from a place like KEH with a warranty. It has a little more chromatic aberration and susceptibility to flare than the Nikkor 12-24, but costs much, much less and is just as sharp. I'm bringing this lens up just because I was in the market for an UWA a few months back and the Tokina ended up being my choice.
Tokina also has an 11-16 F2.8 which is one of if not the sharpest DX UWA lens you can buy but it has a limited range, and there is also a 12-28 F4 out now.
From what I'm reading (though admittedly I only did a few min of research) the Nikkor 10-24 you bought is about as sharp as the Nikkor 12-24, the only big knock against it VS the 12-24 is a cheaper build quality.
Other than that, (unless you PLAN to drop your lens on concrete, or heavily abuse it in general) ...I'd say get whichever lens you want. The 10-24 DX is a killer lens, with amazing sharpness and an extra 2 mm that really does help sometimes when shooting in confined quarters...
I too have been always on a perpetual quest for the ultimate ultra-wide APS-C lens. Why? Especially since I own three full-frame camera bodies already? Because I hate lugging around full-frame bodies and lenses, and I refuse to bring any of them when traveling for personal adventures. It's just me and my Nikon D5300, and we're happy as can be with the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 plus the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8.
However, please understand that the variable aperture creedo is now a myth. They're not just "kit" zooms anymore. Nikon has thoroughly proved this especially with DX lenses, including the likes of the stellar and incredibly sharp 16-85mm, 70-300mm, and now the 10-24mm.
All that a variable aperture lens does nowadays is save weight for those who don't absolutely need a fast aperture at their lenses' telephoto ends, and/or a super-fast aperture in general. The only reason I bought the Tokina 11-16, for example, was because I shoot astro-landscape timelapse type stuff and I absolutely NEED f/2.8 for many different types of scenes. However when I'm working as a general travel photographer, I couldn't care less what my lens' aperture starts at, as long as it's sharp by f/8 or f/11.
By the way, I've personally tested every single ultra-wide DX zoom available for Nikon, from the original 12-24 DX to the latest and hottest new lenses like the Nikon 10-24, the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 (fixed aperture) ...and the Tokina 12-28 f/4 which everybody else seems to forget exists.
The best lenses in the bunch? The Nikon 10-24 really does take the cake for its combination of amazing stopped down sharpness and overall focal range. However the Tokina 12-28 f/4 is even sharper, (and heavier, which may or may not translate into being stronger) ...with a focal range that some might call more practical than others that stop at 20mm or 24mm. Stay away from all the Sigmas and Tamrons, unless you get a good deal on the OLDER, variable aperture Sigma 10-20, which is sharper than the newer one (when stopped down) ...and accepts 77mm filters instead of 82mm.
The Tokina 11-16mm is a champ, with great sharpness (the best around at 11mm, but can have bad copies at 16mm) ...however I usually don't recommend it unless you're ready to put up with the highly restrictive focal range just to get the aperture. Which, like I said unless you find yourself often shooting astro-landscapes or something similar at ISO 6400+, is usually not the case.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum