Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Tokina lens
Feb 16, 2015 09:17:53 #
RICHARD46
Loc: New Jersey
I need some of the pro to evaluate these picture I took with a Tokina 80-400 4.5 5.6 shot at 400mm
I can buy it for $200 Since photography is just a hobby is this a descent lens for the money
Nikon D700
I can buy it for $200 Since photography is just a hobby is this a descent lens for the money
Nikon D700
Feb 16, 2015 09:41:38 #
Easyrider wrote:
I need some of the pro to evaluate these picture I took with a Tokina 80-400 4.5 5.6 shot at 400mm
I can buy it for $200 Since photography is just a hobby is this a descent lens for the money
Picture 6397 ISO 560 f 6.3 1/1000
Picture 6387 ISO 1400 F5.6 1/8000
Picture 6384 ISO 1100 F5.6 1/888
I can buy it for $200 Since photography is just a hobby is this a descent lens for the money
Picture 6397 ISO 560 f 6.3 1/1000
Picture 6387 ISO 1400 F5.6 1/8000
Picture 6384 ISO 1100 F5.6 1/888
I don't see anything wrong with the images. I have one Tokina lens, the 300mm F2.8, and I like it a lot. For $200 for 80-400, it probably sounds about right. I checked eBay and found several being bid upon. Both were sub $200, but the bidding wasn't over yet. For a hobby lens, it should be OK.
Feb 16, 2015 09:45:36 #
I blew them way up and they are somewhat soft, but, acceptable if you are not going to go much beyond 8 X 10. That's a good price for that kind of reach and flexibility. The Nikon version is much better but costs an arm and a leg!
Feb 16, 2015 09:48:45 #
Feb 16, 2015 09:53:47 #
phlash46 wrote:
I blew them way up and they are somewhat soft, but, acceptable if you are not going to go much beyond 8 X 10. That's a good price for that kind of reach and flexibility. The Nikon version is much better but costs an arm and a leg!
He didn't say if he had already tried any sharpening on the images. If not, I suspect it can solve that problem.
I downloaded the flag image and tried to sharpen in LightRoom. At 100%, the star edges are a little fuzzy. But we are talking a $200 lens. It is probably good enough.
Feb 16, 2015 09:59:05 #
JimH123 wrote:
He didn't say if he had already tried any sharpening on the images. If not, I suspect it can solve that problem.
True...
Feb 16, 2015 17:12:33 #
RICHARD46
Loc: New Jersey
Thanks for the time for your opinions.
For the price I paid for me I guess not a bad lens.
For the price I paid for me I guess not a bad lens.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Feb 17, 2015 07:41:42 #
Those images most probably were shot hand held. If they were then it is acceptable to see softness when enlarged.
At their actual sizes they look OK.
At $200 the lens is a bargain in my humble opinion. It is not a Nikon but it will do its job if you do yours.
At their actual sizes they look OK.
At $200 the lens is a bargain in my humble opinion. It is not a Nikon but it will do its job if you do yours.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.