Nikon 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 DX VR AF-P Review
Review Rating:
Last Updated On By Václav Bacovský 81 Comments
Nikon 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6 DX VR AF-P Review
Review Rating:
Reader Interactions
Reader Comments
Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.
Looks like I accidentally set comments to be off earlier – sorry about that! Readers should be able to post comments now.
Nicely done Vaclav. I’m envious of your opportunity to use it on the Canary islands for two weeks – PL must have quite a budget for lens reviews! It seems like a very good starting wide-angle. If you want more, boy you have to pay for it. I’m really curious what this will do to the Tamron 10-24 VC which was released shortly before this lens appeared. The Tamron seemed like such a good idea but then along comes a first party player at a significant discount, with all the native-lens-jpg benefits built in.
It seems to me the AF-P trio + the 35 mm f/1.8 DX makes for an excellent inexpensive kit. Sure there are better lenses out there, but not for the price!
Hi Sean, thanks for your comment.
LOL – if Photographylife paid for trips in order to have good reviews, I believe it would be the most sought-after job in the world. So no, I organise my trips on my own with the side goal to take the reviewed gear with me.
You are right – this lens is a great starter, then it takes some money to upgrade. I am now perfectly happy with my combo 10-20mm DX zoom + 20mm and 14mm fixed FX primes.
And as for DX lenses. Yes, I am about to review the third missing lens – Nikkor 18-55mm AF-P, but so far it seems like a very good lens too, so this AF-P trinity is great combination in my opinion (especially when completed with one fixed prime, as you suggest). The price and the weight is superb! Canon has nothing comparatively as good…[EDIT: Canon has a superb 10-18mm version which is also small and optically excellent]
You mean this Nikon is (much) better than the Canon 10-18? Other reviews give me a different impression. Besides that, the Canon 10-18 plus 22 pancake plus 55-250 seem also a very good set to me. Love my Nikon AF-P 18-55 tho.
Hi, no, you are right, Canon 10-18mm is also excellent lens – I forgot about that one, so I correct my judgment in the comment above. V.
Hi Vaclav
Thanks for the review and comparisons. Seems to be a nice little lens. Too bad it does not work but with the newest cameras. Did you by any chance ever try the pro grade DX 12-24mm f/4 ? I thought Nikon was discontinuing and replacing it with the consumer grade DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5. But know I learned that they listed it again. I do own such a copy and I see that it is more expensive than it had been a few years ago.
My regards!
-jan
Hi Jan, unfortunately I have never had a chance to shoot with 12-24mm Nikkor. And since none of mine friends owns this lens, I cannot really do any comparison any time soon. But thanks for the info – I actually thought it is well discontinued. Vaclav
My Tokina 14-20 mm f/2 DX suited me well.After releasing this new Nikon lens,I gave it a try for almost 25 days.Very disappointed to see its IQ.Returned it back,now happy more than ever with my Tokina!
I hope to test this Tokina soon – I am glad you are happy with it! Was the biggest difference in sharpness, build quality (both expected for me), or anything else?
For the kind of landscape/wildlife shooting that I work with,lower f stop is a must.Imagine that you are in a very dark night,looking closely into a large pond,looking for large eyes of crocodiles popping out like a submarine.Imagine you are on a top mountain summit,looking for a flock of bats,hanged on trees inside a very dark,gloomy,large cave and you are right below them,lying down to have better shots.
Also,I have less distortion which is easily manageable in post processing without compromising my shots when I work with Tokina.Sharpness in that Nikkor within 10 to 12 is not favorable to me enough and I have seen that even at 14mm,I had better sharpness over Tokina than Nikkor lens.Tokina is like a tank,rock solid.This range of 10 to almost 14 is neither good at previous Nikkor lens when I was working as real-estate photographer,nor within previous Tokina lenses.
My kit now is the Nikon D3300, Sigma 17-50 f2.8, this tiny little lens and the Nikon 55-200 VR DX. The whole kit costs like 800 euros and it takes great pictures, of whatever focal length I want to and most importantly doesn’t weigh a ton and I’m super happy! I don’t care how Nikon is doing in the professional segment but for the entry/hobbyist level I really think they offer too much for very little.
Maybe I should add the 35 f1.8 DX to make it a wholly 1000 euros setup so as to add the low-light performance, but I’m already satisfied with the constant f2.8 and OS from the Sigma now.
Hi Quang Pham
You are certainly right. Besides my D4/D800E combo with a range of pro lenses I own a D3200 with a DX 35mm f/1.8 and the 18-55mm kit lens. Both are equal in image quality if there is enough light (and you do not pixel peep) for most of us. The difference is the wider usage the pro grade gear makes possible in exchange with a very small and lightweight package. If Nikon should ever release a FX DSLR made like the D3x00, I’d be the first to buy it: lightweight, big viewfinder, low image noise (high ISO).
I very much like my D3200 and every time I leave for holidays I have a hard time to choose what to take with me. Last time I took the D800E with a 50mm and a 20mm. Next time it will be the D3200 with a 35mm and the small zoom. It is definitely lighter to carry and I do not have to take care so much (get lost, stolen or damaged) It is, a few hundred $ against a few thousand $.
My regards!
-jan
My words Jan!
Jan,
I agree. I have a D3300 with the 18-55 VRII and 55-200 VRII. I also have a D750 with 14-24, and other FX lenses. I bring my D3300 everywhere and shoot family events and snapshots. It is light and versatile and as you said I am not out $1000s of dollars if it gets damaged or stolen. I love my D750 and use it for astrophotography and for landscapes but I have taken almost twice as many shots with my D3300 kit because it is easy to take biking, hiking, skiing, etc. Like you said if Nikon made an FX camera the size of the D3300 but with the features of the D750, I would buy it.
I am thinking of getting the 10-20mm Nikon as I shoot a lot of landscapes. It definitely won’t replace my 14-24 but its low cost and small light design means I can take it anywhere.
Chris
Thanks for this review Vaclav. I’ve already bought this lens but it’s good to see a professional detailed review of it, compared with others. I bought it because of its light weight and portability, as well as being great for indoor tourism shots of cathedrals and the like.
One thing that I’d note is that this lens works great for 4K video on the D7500, which has a 1.5x crop above the DX 1.5x crop. The autofocus is extremely fast on that camera in live view and perfectly usable for video!
Please definitely do a review on the 18-55 AF-P VR. It’s uncommon to find online, because it’s a kit zoom, and not ‘cool’, but it’s probably going to be the most used Nikkor in the world in the near future, so it’d be cool to see how the IQ compares! And to see whether a Sigma 17-50, or Nikon 16-80 is much of an upgrade, for the purposes of ideal image quality only (not aperture or focal range).
Hi Harry, good point with the video and crop mode. Honestly, I did not try this one when shooting videos, I heavily rely on 18-55 version (paired with D5300).
And yes, the review of 18-55 AF-P lens is already in the making. But it will take time now since I will be travelling a lot. I will try to include comparison with Sigma and other Nikkor lenses.
Vaclav,
Since this DX lens worked reasonably well on FX bodies, would you comment on how it compares to the Nikon FX 16-35mm F/4 lens?
I do not own the 16-35 lens. I would not really consider those as competitors, you can use the 10-20mm DX lens only in the range of 13-20mm with heavy vignetting. The edges tend to be soft, the centre is very good to excellent in my view. I would expect the corner performance of 16-35 to be way better. I am not sure about the centre performance comparison, would be interesting…
Vaclav, thanks for your review. I really enjoyed your photographs and your artistic vision.
Thanks Rick for your kind words!
I recently bought the Tamron 15 – 30 f 2.8 to go with my D740 and Nikon 20 – 300. Great lens but it’s a beast sizewise. Spent a lot of time comparing the Tamron to other wide angle zooms and concluded the weight wasn’t much different than the 28 – 300 so it wouldn’t bother me and it doesn’t even though most of my pictures are travel and street.
didn’t occur to me to consider this or other DX lenses.
Darn….
Well, Tamron really is a beast – both in terms of the performance and the weight. You should not regret, you have a much wider array of creativity with this lens. For my landscape needs, the tiny DX Nikkor is just fine for most of the situations. V.
sorry, D 750
Vaclav,
Thanks for the review and all of the sample photos. Appreciate the time it took.
At the bottom, the purchase link has the wrong focal length lens listed (minor detail).
18) Where to Buy
You can purchase the Nikon 10-24mm DX VR AF-P lens from our trusted partner B&H Photo Video for $306.95 (as of 10/10/2017).
Thanks again,
Lou
Thanks Lou, we will correct that!
Thanks a lot Václav for this and your other real-world reviews of affordable lenses. Great images too, you’re an excellent photographer. I’m looking forward to the 18-55mm AF-P review.
main drawback for me is the plastic mount.
you can break a lens with a metal mount. but only if you drop or hit something with it. but it is easier to break a plastic mount just changing a lens.
it is not for me
I believe you made a mistake in the bokeh section. In the first sentence you wrote: “It is hard to achieve any bokeh with wide-angle lens featuring slow shutter speeds” you meant slow apertures?:)
oh, yes, you are right – I will correct that, thanks! V.
Great review. Thank you ! I was very interested in this new zoom but after reading it, I think I’ll keep on using my Tokina 11-16mm. Next time maybe :D
Tokina is optically a really great lens. I just always had issues with focusing – no matter what body I used, the focus acquisition was erratic. I think it is ultimately the reason I never really used it much (except for some basic astrophotography).
Dear Vaclav ,
thanks for this review, really enjoyed,
the photos you clicked are excellent..
Have you used sigma10-20 ,3.5f, ? If so which one got better IQ?
Dear Subin, I am glad you enjoyed the review. I could only compare it with the older version of Sigma 10-20mm, which was worse optically (it does not handle direct sun well). As far as I remember from reading reviews, the Sigma suffers from weak corner performance…
Dear Vaclav,
Thank you for your reply, I decided to go for nikkor,it’s economical too..
Hi Vaclav, Thanks a lot for the review. But I’m confused with one small thing is that, I have D5200 body, and your review says this lens will have limited functionality for D5200. What I’m unable to understand is that what exact functionalities would be limited on D5200 body?
Also I have upgraded firmware on D5200, but I do not see any option to turn on / off VR in “Shooting Menu”. So does that means, if I buy this lens, I won’t be able to turn on / off the VR? In that case what’s the default status of VR? Is it On or Off?
It’d be great if you can please clarify these things.
Hi, that is exactly the only limitation – you will not be able to turn the VR off, by default it will be on (which in most situations is just fine). So not sucha big deal I think. Hope this helps, Vaclav
Dear Vaclav,
Please tell me about the limitations of the lens along with d7200,
Dear Vaclav,
Please tell me about the limitations of the lens along with d7200,?
Dear Subin, the only limitation is that you cannot turn the optical stabilisation (VR) off – it will be by default on all the time. But as I wrote above, it is not a problem, I could not notice this would render softer images when shooting with longer shutter speeds on tripod.
Hi Vaclav,
Thanks for this review .
OK , there are lenses for everyone out there . Cheap , average price or expensive .
What I do not understand is why the limitations with cameras like D7000/7100/7200 series.
I mean , there are companies out there like Sigma, Tamron & Tokina doing a great job for new and old Nikon (Canon as well ) bodies and at a reasonable price. And here is Nikon that have not produced a DX lens in 10-20mm department with faster aperture than f4(well until now, but 3.5 is not like 2.8) at all. I understand you do not need it for landscapes almost at all but why not for low light shots.On top of that they are producing new lenses almost compatible with modern DX bodies. Well I do not think that will encourage Nikon fans to buy those lenses.Most of them read reviews like this and will rather stay with the old lens of go to the competition in stead.
Anyway , I will go to a mirrorless system at some point ,but Nikon is actually loosing business to Tokina ,Sigma & Tamron which in some/many cases offer better overall lenses than Nikon.
Well , we could buy the heavy 14-24 f2.8 ,( that is a brilliant lens,) but that beast is so heavy and pricey and frankly not suited for an amateur or even enthusiast.
I do not see a point in buying this cheap(Nikkor 10-20), plastic lens when I can get the Tokina 11-16 used for £250. Yeah it goes to 20mm , but I find myself most of the time shooting at the widest side anyway…or I can save few pounds more and get the Tokina 11-20 f2.8. It will probably serve me way longer and it is not much heavier than the Nikkor.
Just my opinion.
Best Regards,
A
Hi, I can only repeat myself – I do not understand Nikon policy on D7000 incompatibility and D7100 and 7200 partly incompatibility either…
But I see one reason why this lens might serve well for Nikon sales: their most revenues come from entry level DSLRs, and there people really do not want heavy lenses. So size and weight matters. I think that Nikon now offers a very competitive set of three AF-P lenses. If you consider the size and weight (btw – Tokina 11-16 is way way heavier than Nikkor 10-20mm, trust me, I have just photographed in Antwerpen with Tokina and I could feel it on my neck) of entry DSLRs with those AF-P lenses, mirrorless (APS-C) system is not so much smaller then.
Getting some f/2,8 DX wide-angle zoom from Nikon would be nice, at the time being it seems rather as wishful thinking…
Hi Vaclav, very interesting and useful review. You pictures are also amazing, not a common combination out there.
I am looking for a Nikon DX wide angle lens to start taken real estate photography. Do you think this lens is ok for this purpose? Or is it necessary to have a full frame body to control the distortion? In this regards I have read that the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 performs worse than this nikkor 10-20mm managing the distortion.
What are your impressions?
I will also comment to me kit to other than mentioned here. D5500 + AF-P 18-55 + 35mm f1.8G + 50mm f1.8G + 55-200mm kit. I mostly use the 50mm, the 35mm is not as good as I expected. Actually I am selling it. I would like to have some prime like the canon 24mm f2.8, then I would sell my 18-55.
Regards
Hi Gustavo, difficult question – FX has obviously many advantages in wide-angle range. It guess the optimal combo might be some D610 or D750 or D810 (you do not need action camera for indoor photography) with 14-24 lens, which except for the prime fixed 12mm Venus Optic Laowa lens is the best option in terms of distortion control. 16-35mm is worse for sure. The cheapest 18-35mm version does relatively well.
The ultimate lens is obviously the 19mm tilt shift, but the price is out of this world….
So if you want to save money and stay with DX, 10-20mm is not bad for the beginning, it has some distortion, but so do the other competitors. I find Tokina 11-20mm and Tamron 10-24mm to be better in terms of distortion control.
Good luck with your choice!
Hello Václav
Thank you for your soon answer. The 14-24 is out of my budget so far, even worse considering that I should add at least the D610.
I will try the 10-20mm with my D5500 at first, is the lowest risk. If things goes well I will consider upgrading to FF.
Thank you again and congrats for the blog!
So Tokina 11-20 will be a better buy ?
I have a d3100 and am recently interested in landscapes while traveling. This lens doesn’t play well with my body and I was thinking of upgrading to d3400 to be able to buy this lens. I want to stay light and nimble which is why I do not want the d7500 (not to mention cost). Some have said moving from d3100 to d3400 makes no sense . Some have recommended I buy the tokina 11-20 which seems good but is heavy.
What would you do.
Buying D3400 instead of D3100 makes sense to me, the differences are pretty significant (sensor quality and resolution, screen resolution, weight, battery life, focusing motor, video capabilities). Tokina is great but really heavy. So I would go for D3400 and Nikkor 10-20mm if weight matters to you. V.
Thanks!
Are the new AF-P lens an advantage over the previous kit AF-S lenses?
I also have an AF-S 35 f 1.8- will that work fully with the d3400?
no problem with 35mm
AF-P lenses are much better for videotaping and better in terms of focus speed, so I would go for them
Will this lenses work for Nikon D610?
Do you have some tips for ultra-wide lenses (but not fish eye) for Nikon D610? Something not too expensive, with auto-focus and about 10 -24 mm
Thanks
Hi Roman, there is nowadays a decent line-up of different wide-angle lenses (both Nikon and third party). But most of them are really heavy and expensive (such as Nikkor 14-24mm or Tamron 15-30mm) and with limited option to screw on CPL filters (which I really think is important for landscape photography). So I would personally go for the cheaper (but still great) Nikkor 18-35mm and add one fixed prime – either Rokinon 14mm f/2,8 (or 12mm Rokinon Fish-eye – which is still very rectilinear, covering full sensor – i.e. no just a circle of it) or Irix 15 or 11mm. If you would prefer just one lens, than Nikkor 16-35mm might be the best all around option.
Note: 10-24mm is a typical DX focal range, 10mm is super ultra-wide on FX, the nearest lens in this range for FX is Sigma 12-24mm, but is also an expensive and heavy one.
Thanks for the review Václav. A quick question, if I may…. how is the autofocus of this lens, working with the D3400?
It will work pretty well. I use the combo D5300 + Nikkor 10-20mm and the autofocus is fast ans accurate. I assume the D3400 has the same autofocus system as D5300. V.
Thanks Václav. Buying it now.
Dear Václav, nicely done review! Helped a lot making such decision of buying some start-up ultra wide-angle lens. Do you have any idea, when the review of Nikon af-p 18-55 VR could be ready? :)
Thank you.
David
Hi David, I hope I will finish the review within two weeks. Let me know if you have any concrete questions beforehand. V.
Hi Václav, thank you very much for your kind offer.
I think it would be great to see how this lens fares against alternatives within this focal range, for example Sigma 17-50 OS, Tamron 17-50, maybe even comparison against Nikon 16-85 would be helpful for many of us.
I would personally also like to see the performance comparison with Nikon 35mm DX(or Nikon 40mm) and Nikon 20mm. I know all of these are primes, but just to see how big difference they all make in comparison would help, together with brief information how this lens handle direct sunlight, sunstars, bokeh, etc..
…now when I read all above, I´m sorry, I didn’t want to make a to-do list for you :) this is just a suggestion, I know making these reviews requires a lot of your free time already, so I am really personally grateful you’ve decided to make one anyway.
Looking forward to see your findings!
Have a great day.
D.
I think there is an error near the beginning of the text: “and the recently reviewed Nikkor 700-300mm tele-zoom lens ….”
Have a great day!
Need help :) In last 2-3 weeks I’m trying to make a decision which lens to buy between Tokina 11-16 and this lens. I’m new in photography and I have d3300 with AF-P 18-55 and AF-S 35 mm. I want to shoot landscapes, outdoors and little indoors. Thanks in advance.
Also can I turn on/off VR with d3300?
Thanks.
Sorry, i cannot check it on my own, as I do not own the camera. However, it seems that it might be possible after firmware update. At least it works on my D5300 and D3300 is younger, so I guess it should be there.
Actually, if you already own D3300 + 18-55 AF-P, you can check it on your own. It is down in the “shooting menu”.
My AF-P 18-55 lens is without VR so I can not check, in “shooting menu” I do not have VR option. Anyway I found on Nikon website that I need to upgrade firmware version from 1.01 to 1.02.
Hi Nemanja, not an easy dilemma, so let me break it up to several aspects:
Weight and size: clear plus for Nikkor, Tokina is considerably bulkier and heavier
Optics: clear plus for Tokina, although Nikkor is good enough (actually almost excellent in the range of 10-18mm)
Zoom range: it all depends how much you want to change lenses, at times I am lazy in difficult conditions and I appreciate having a bit wider zooming range…Tokina narrow range is the price you pay for the superior optics
Stabilisation: quite a big thing for me, plus for Nikkor (except if you want to shoot from tripod almost all the time)
Focus speed: nikkor is quikcer, but it does not matter so much in this range. I have some doubts about accuracy with Tokina, I came frustrated after photographing with Tokina Iguazu falls, all my photos suffered from front focus, I could never really tell if it was body issue, or rather lens problem (I later realized my body was faulty, but the issue re-occured even later on other bodies).
Aperture: it might be handy for indoor action to have the f/2.8 option (crucial for astrophotogarphy), so plus for Tokina, but do not expect any shallow depth of field anyway.
Sunstars: if you are into landscape, this might come handy: when stopped down, Tokikna yields magnificent 18-pointed sunstars. Nikkor shape of sunstar is a bit messy.
I would go for Nikkor, but also because I use FX and Nikkor 20mm AF-S f/1.8 for action and indoors.
Good luck with your choice, and no worries, either is good!
Dear Vaclav, as I see only two bad points for Nikkor: aperture and build quality (plastic mount). I’m nature lover and 70% of my shooting time camera will be on tripod. For me the price is also important, in Serbia Nikkor is 20% cheaper. If you have any recommendation for some other wide lens please send me but at the end I think that I will buy Nikkor. Huge thanks for help and great review. All best from Serbia.
Great review! Thank you for taking the time to put that together. I’m debating a similar situation to Nemanja. I’m an amateur with a D3400 looking for a wide angle lens to do a little bit of everything at a decent price. The catch is that I am also interested in getting into astrophotography. Does this mean I should lean toward the Tokina? Price is important, but I wouldn’t mind sending extra if it will better suit me.
My current lens lineup is 18-55mm AF-P 3.5-5.6 VR kit lens, 55-200mm AF-S Nikkor 4-5.6 VR II, and the 35mm 1.8 AF-S Nikkor prime.
Also, how is the 18-55 kit lens for doing some landscape shots?
Thank you in advance!
I forgot to mention I do a lot of hiking and traveling, which will factor into my decision. I’m not sure if weight is worth the sacrifice for astrophotogrpahy capabilities. Or maybe I am trying to squeeze too much out of only one lens.
Hi Mike, I can relate to your dilemma, I had the same about 4 years ago, when I went to Atacama desert and wanted to photograph stars but also wanted something light-weight for demanding hikes in Patagonia. I bought Tokina 11-16mm, but although it was optically better than my Nikkor 10-24mm, due to very limited focus range I never really fell in love with it (and it remained largely in a shelf), I used it mostly for star-trails and similar things only. I think that for hiking an travelling it is just too good to have a 10-20mm AF-P wide-angle, which weights as little as 200g, with such decent or even excellent features. You should know that even with a great lens for astrophotography (such as some Rokinon Prime or Tokina f/2.0 zoom) you will still get rather mediocre results due to high noise of D3400. In your case, I would consider investing in some tracking system, then you can use even slower zooms, the extra long exposures will allow you to use low ISO setting and even with your D3400 you will get some cool results. I never really checked whether the AF-P Nikkor has any coma issues, I may try to figure it out once we have a clear night here. Vaclav
And as for 18-55mm AF-P lens: I am just reviewing it, the review will be published here in about a week or so, I am quite happy with the lens for landscape purpose. More to follow soon!
Thanks for a very informative review. It’s now on my shopping list. Just need to persuade the wife!!!!!
Good luck with that, we all know this situation, I guess :)
Hey Good Review.
I own a D5600, looking for the best lens option for Real Estate Photography (Indoor-Outdoor) Interiors & Architectural. Weight is not a problem for me, Image quality should be superior and minimum distortion even at edges and minimum Chromatic Aberration. Mostly would be using around 10mm to cover most of the indoor rooms.
Budget is max USD 400-500.
What would be the best for my purpose Nikon 10-20, Tokina, Tamron or Sigma ?
Hey, I would go for Tokina AT-X 11-20 F2.8 PRO DX. It is very sharp even wide open, so there might be suituations when you really need to shoot at f/2.8. Distortion at 11mm is not stellar, at around 4%, but is a plain barrel distortion which can be corrected. Not much of CA. I have a lot of experience with 11-16mm f2.8 PRO DX II lens, which is also great, but I would prefer the wider zoom range. I have no experience with Tamron, and not that great experience with Sigma wideangle. Good luck with your choice! V.
Hi everyone! I have a D7100 but i can’t focus with my nikkor 10-20mm. I need somebody help
When you switch on the camera, does the lens react to that? Are you sure the manual switch on the body (at the bottom near the lens mount) is on?
I have a Nikon 5300 with a 18-55 kit lens. I saw the several comments and up course your informative review about Nikkor 10-20 wide angle lens. But I want to know a quick comparison between 18-55 & 10-20.
Hi Aritra, sorry for my late response. These two (speaking of 18-55mm AF-P version) have similar design in terms of size, weight, focusing, materials. I would even say that the image quality (i.e. sharpness and colour rendition) is very similar. So in the end it is all about your need of particualar focal length. I think both are need for landscape photography.You can have a look at my detailed review of the 18-55mm lens here: photographylife.com/revie…dx-vr-af-p
Dear Vaclav, This is by far the best review of the Nikon 10 20 Lens.
I have been looking at this lens for a long time now, have D5600 , 18 – 55 , 55 – 200 , & 35 F1.8 so this addition for wide angle will complete my ideal kit. A quick question , I hope you don’t mind .
I’m planning a trip to New York November 2018 , will the 10 20 lens be good for Cityscape photographs ?
Kindest Regards Stephen Fox
He Stephen, thanks for you feedback. It would definitely be my choice for a DX body. If you like to shoot a lot during blue hour, I would consider also some fixed prime for better rendering of point-lights (you could perhaps do that with 35mm and occasionally stitch several photo for a panorama, if you drag a tripod), but if I wanted to travel light, the 10-20mm is a nobrainer for me. Vaclav
Hi Vaclav,
Thanks for your review. I hesitate between this lens and the sigma 10-20 mm f/3.5 EX DC USM. I have a D7500 and the excellent Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 which I absolutely loved, so I am wondering which one would be a better pick. Thanks
Aymeric
Hi Aymeric, I cant really tell, I have never used the 10-20mm Sigma f/3.5 lens. It is a slightly faster lens, but my guess is that for 99% situations it wont play any role, for me the Nikkor VR, size and focus speed (mostly for video shooting) would lean me towards the Nikon version. V.