Need input.....Tokina 12-24 lens decision

[Liz]

Last week I took the leap & purchased the Tokina 12-24 lens. It rained every day until yesterday so I haven't even tried it out yet, but it's on my camera waiting to go out this afternoon.

In the meantime my washing machine surprisingly broke and yesterday I spent $500 on a new one. This put me back in the indecision mode since the lens is the same amount. I have a photography budget and have $600 left from selling a few lenses last year. I don't usually use the photography money for other things, but I will either have to "borrow" from there for the washer or take it out of my savings.

That's the background. The main factor for the indecision is the question I have in my mind - Will I use this lens enough to warrant spending the $500 on it (the last of my photo budget money)? I have no question about the quality of the lens.

I've always wanted an ultra-wide angle lens; however, I never purchased one because they're expensive and I always wondered if I would use it enough. I finally made the decision to take the leap and spend the money. However, now that I just charged $500 for a new washer, I'm having the same old question about it.........will I use it enough?

Since my photography time is limited, there is a real question as to what I will use it for other than landscapes. I don't do group photography - and for small groups I use the 28mm.

Don't get me wrong - I really want this lens. But I've "wanted" lenses in the past, purchased one, and discovered it was only a whim and ended up selling it.

I'm just trying to be realistic and am trying to figure out if this is one of those "whims" or will I utilize this lens $500 worth.

I would appreciate some thoughts because I can't see the woods for the trees.

Thanks!
Liz

[Old Timer]

Oh Gee!! I wish I had a magic solution. I have a similar problem in that I bought two new lenses this spring thinking I was in good shape after a pretty good year last year. The same day (yesterday) the newest lens came in I got hit with an unexpected tax bill of near $5,000. I'm going to be able to work it out without giving up either lens but it sure puts a cloud over the purchases. As for the 12-24 you know I think it's a great lens and has already gotten me out of one tricky situation that I wouldn't have been able to handle with a group shot this weekend. I really think you will find lots of uses for it other than landscapes, but if the mental anguish of keeping it is going to ruin the pleasure of using it then return it and pay for the washer and ease your mind. I wish life didn't throw us these little curves but it invariably does and it's up to us to work them out.

[Frog]

Why buy a "new" washer. Slightly used ones are cheap on Craig's list.

[MB1]

When I was shooting with the DX size sensor that lens was on my camera most of the time. It is a keeper.

OTOH if you ain't making money off your photography and you must have that washer.........

[another view]

However, now that I just charged $500 for a new washer, I'm having the same old question about it.........will I use it enough?

What, the washer? We have one and use it at least a few times a week. Well worth the investment. Oh wait, the lens!

I guess it comes down to a financial question. If you were working profesionally, you'd need both but the lens is a "want" for amateurs (there is nothing negative about that word, IMO, I'm one too). Not to say that you shouldn't keep the lens. You have other nice gear and know what it can do. I use my super-wide quite often and would hate to be without it.

If you returned the lens, would you pay return shipping (as well as the shipping to get it to you in the first place) and/or a restocking charge, only to re-order it later and pay another shipping cost? If that were the case I'd keep it and put the money back into savings as I could.

[Liz]

As for the 12-24 you know I think it's a great lens and has already gotten me out of one tricky situation that I wouldn't have been able to handle with a group shot this weekend. I really think you will find lots of uses for it other than landscapes, but if the mental anguish of keeping it is going to ruin the pleasure of using it then return it and pay for the washer and ease your mind. I wish life didn't throw us these little curves but it invariably does and it's up to us to work them out.

Thanks for the input, OT.

When I finish my taxes tomorrow, I'll have a better idea of where I stand financially. As I mentioned previously, I've always wanted an ultrawide lens. The money is still budgeted for photography so that's one consolation.

It didn't occur to me until I saw your shot of the group that this lens would work in that situation. I don't usually do groups, but once in a while I've struggled with a friend's family group picture because I only had the 50mm/f1.4 to work with - and it didn't work! I now have the 28mm/f1.8 too which is just a bit better, but not what I'd call wide.

BTW, these are the only 2 lenses I have now - I do miss the variety pack I used to have!

Liz

[Liz]

Why buy a "new" washer. Slightly used ones are cheap on Craig's list.

Actually it's too late! But thanks for the idea. I got a good deal - $500 washer on sale for $448, plus another 10% off. Lowe's returns the $65 delivery charge in 2 weeks as a rebate. And delivery includes hook-up and taking the old machine.

Liz

[Liz]

When I was shooting with the DX size sensor that lens was on my camera most of the time. It is a keeper.

OTOH if you ain't making money off your photography and you must have that washer.........

I can take it out of my savings. If I take it out of my photography budget - it will go back there eventually anyway.

What kind of photography do you use it for?

Liz

[Liz]

I guess it comes down to a financial question. If you were working profesionally, you'd need both but the lens is a "want" for amateurs (there is nothing negative about that word, IMO, I'm one too). Not to say that you shouldn't keep the lens. You have other nice gear and know what it can do. I use my super-wide quite often and would hate to be without it.

Yes, it is a want - I just want to be sure it's not just a "whim" As for my other gear, I sold all the heavier lenses so it leaves me with the 50mm/f1.4 and the 28mm/f1.4. I sold my favorites - the 17-40L (wide, but not like the 12mm), 24-105L IS and the 70-300IS which is such a great lens - almost the quality of an "L." The Tokina is also a bit heavy for me, but I wouldn't be carrying it around for street photography which is what I used the others for - and walked for hours carrying the weight around my neck.

If you returned the lens, would you pay return shipping (as well as the shipping to get it to you in the first place) and/or a restocking charge, only to re-order it later and pay another shipping cost? If that were the case I'd keep it and put the money back into savings as I could.

I got it an Norman Camera for $10 less than anywhere else which covered some of the shipping. I would have to pay return shipping plus insurance - about $15. No restocking charge. Actually, wondering about whether I should have sent it back would probably drive me to ordering it sooner or later.

Steve, what do you use your superwide for other than landscape?

Liz

[another view]

My point about the shipping was that you paid $10-15 to get it to you and will pay that to return it, so you're $25 behind seeing as they don't have a restocking charge. I say $25 behind because if you did reorder it you'd pay the $10-15 once again to get lens #2 to you. Plus, I don't see the US dollar getting any stronger so the price of the lens may go up (wonder if that had anything to do with the lack of Nikon rebates at the end of last year) and cost of transportation is only going to increase.

I use my Sigma 10-20 for a lot of things, one being interiors. Layne Kennedy was the guy who got me hooked on a 20mm lens on a 35mm film SLR. That first image you see was taken with one, and probably on Provia slide film. A lot of his shots might not look like they were taken with a super-wide, but probably more than you might guess - IOW I don't think he over-uses it as a perspective distortion special effect.

[Liz]

My point about the shipping was that you paid $10-15 to get it to you and will pay that to return it, so you're $25 behind seeing as they don't have a restocking charge. I say $25 behind because if you did reorder it you'd pay the $10-15 once again to get lens #2 to you. Plus, I don't see the US dollar getting any stronger so the price of the lens may go up (wonder if that had anything to do with the lack of Nikon rebates at the end of last year) and cost of transportation is only going to increase.

I use my Sigma 10-20 for a lot of things, one being interiors. Layne Kennedy was the guy who got me hooked on a 20mm lens on a 35mm film SLR. That first image you see was taken with one, and probably on Provia slide film. A lot of his shots might not look like they were taken with a super-wide, but probably more than you might guess - IOW I don't think he over-uses it as a perspective distortion special effect.

Steve,
Your input has been a great help in sorting this out. You're right about the money. Buying and returning and buying a lens is costly. You're right about the US dollar, increasing prices and transportation.....

I want to thank you for the link to Layne Kennedy. What awesome, incredible photos! Wow! If nothing else convinces me to keep this lens, nothing will. After viewing his images, I was actually wondering if I should have gone for the 10-22. His creativity, composition, subjects, use of equipment WOWED me! I was very inspired. I doubt if I will return this lens after seeing what he does with wide!

Thanks so much Steve.....I really appreciate you taking the time to bring some clarity into the situation - and for the link to LK. I spent a bit of time there, and intend to go back tonight to see more. I was really intrigued with his photography.

ETA: I wonder if you would consider posting the Layne Kennedy website link on the Ultra-Wide Angle thread - I think it would be a great inspiration to those who just purchased - or already have - a wide angle lens (and for us wannabees too!),



Liz

[mjs1973]

I vote for keeping the lens as long as it doesn't hurt you financially. I use mine primarily for nature and landscape type images and I love it. As others have mentioned it also comes in handy when shooting interiors. I don't use my Tokina as much as some of my other lenses, but I know I would miss it if I didn't have it.

[Liz]

I vote for keeping the lens as long as it doesn't hurt you financially. I use mine primarily for nature and landscape type images and I love it. As others have mentioned it also comes in handy when shooting interiors. I don't use my Tokina as much as some of my other lenses, but I know I would miss it if I didn't have it.

Thanks Mike. I'm leaning toward keeping it! Believe it or not, it's been raining since I got it - so tomorrow is my first time to try it out. I see what it can do though viewing all these images.

Liz

[another view]

wondering if I should have gone for the 10-22

Don't second guess yourself - keep the Tokina! I have heard (rumor) that it's about the same design as the Nikon 12-24 which is an excellent lens. Layne was a huge fan of the 20 on 35mm film, and that's about a 14mm lens on a 1.5x or 1.6x DSLR - so with your new lens you're all set with that angle of view.

I went on one of Layne's workshops in 2001 and had a blast. He's a lot of fun to spend time with, a great teacher and really opened my eyes to photography in general. Some day I'd love to go on his winter sled dog trip, but it's a bit pricey... He is a Nikon shooter and was featured in their magazine awhile back - from that I know he has been shooting digital these days but he doesn't talk much about gear.

Good idea about posting the link in the ultra-wide thread but I feel like I should put one of my own shots in there too. Let me look...