Tokina 17-35 f:4 problems on D750
Jun 3, 2015 09:06:48 #
Carl rl
Loc: Lutz, FL
I am looking at getting a Tokina wide angle lens for use on my D750. Specifically either the 17-35 f:4 or the 16-28 f:2.8. Leaning towards the 17-35 both for greater range, ability to use filters and less weight. However I saw some comments regarding the rear element interfering with the mirror at 17mm on the Nikon D750. Wondering if anyone has some input regarding this possible problem.
Thanks, Carl
Thanks, Carl
Jun 3, 2015 11:12:53 #
Carl rl wrote:
I am looking at getting a Tokina wide angle lens for use on my D750. Specifically either the 17-35 f:4 or the 16-28 f:2.8. ...l
Can't speak to the interference issue but love the optics on my 16-28/2.8.
Jun 4, 2015 09:05:28 #
Carl rl
Loc: Lutz, FL
Thanks for your response. I think I'm going to play it safe as well as enjoy the high image quality of the 16-28. It has better reviews in general than the 17-35 and its only drawback is the weight. But owning both the Sigma 150-500 and an older 80-200 that is all metal, I guess the extra weight shouldn't bother me. And with your high recommendation I think I'm going for the 16-28. Thanks, Carl
Jun 4, 2015 16:59:28 #
Carl rl wrote:
I am looking at getting a Tokina wide angle lens for use on my D750. Specifically either the 17-35 f:4 or the 16-28 f:2.8. Leaning towards the 17-35 both for greater range, ability to use filters and less weight. However I saw some comments regarding the rear element interfering with the mirror at 17mm on the Nikon D750. Wondering if anyone has some input regarding this possible problem.
Thanks, Carl
Thanks, Carl
I have the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 and am very happy with it on my D600 and D800E Bodies.
I don't use filters, no reason to on a wide angle Lens.
Craig
Jun 4, 2015 19:38:05 #
Carl rl
Loc: Lutz, FL
Hi Craig,
Thanks for your reply. So far, 100% in favor of the 16-28 with the only drawback being the weight. And with a Sigma 150-500 and an 80-200 f:2.8 thats the all metal version, the extra weight is not an issue for me. So I think its time to head down to the photo store next week to place an order for one.
Thanks again for your help and input.
Carl
Thanks for your reply. So far, 100% in favor of the 16-28 with the only drawback being the weight. And with a Sigma 150-500 and an 80-200 f:2.8 thats the all metal version, the extra weight is not an issue for me. So I think its time to head down to the photo store next week to place an order for one.
Thanks again for your help and input.
Carl
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.