There are for Nikon users what super wide angle is concerned, some alternatives that come into question. This also includes the Sigma 12-24.
I had the Nikon 16-35mm f4 and wanted a wide angle dramatischereres for spectacular shots. The Nikon 16-35mm is not bad. Hardly vignetting and in the center insanely sharp. The sharpness can toward the edge at 16mm focal length - at least in my copy - but strong for. To my taste too strong. The Nikon 16-35 lens has hardly vignetting on, has an anti-shake and is in my opinion for less experienced users good use. Positive to use the opportunity filter.
The Sigma 12mm focal length can afford the full format. The photos are super spectacular through the large picture angle. The lens is surprisingly easy, despite great feel with lots of metal parts. Also the lens cap to protect the lens is made of metal.
However, filters are only possible with DX cameras. The attachment of the use of filters allows to be removed for full frame.
The photos are good on the sharpness in the center. In my opinion, just a little small sharp than the 16-35mm. Are to the edge, the photos just like the 16-35mm however quite blurred. For this reason I have sent the lens back.
I think the lens is not suitable for beginners, the only photograph in jpg. The darkening of the center to the wheel at maximum aperture should be about 2 stops and is more than can be seen clearly. When the shutter is closed at least another. 1 stop. Also can be seen clearly chromatic aberrations.
Expanding the photos in Camera Raw is off the darkening with a click Lens Correction. Likewise, the chromatic aberrations with a single click in the Raw can eliminate development. The photos are then to use super and have a spectacular viewing angle at 12 mm focal length. In the center sharpness is good enough, toward the edge this will lessen considerably.
For photographers who can handle RAW camera the lens is an economical alternative to very expensive Nikon 14-24mm f 2.8.
However, I have a heavy heart decided to more than double to buy me the Nikon 14-24 and send the Sigma back. The Nikon 14-24mm is about as sharp as the Sigma at f 2.8, but without a clearly visible Randabdunklung. In the center the Nikon maybe a bit sharper at f 2.8. On the screen are both about the same armed or disarmed.
Dimmed the Nikon is super sharp and far more sharply with the D800 also on the edge yet. However, the Nikon weighs considerably more than the Sigma. One has to have it hang feel a block to the camera.
Who does not the super super looking Wide, should also look at times the Nikon full-frame 18-35, or the Tokina f. 2.8 16-35.
