Tokina vs Tokina: I have read so much about the Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 and its sharp focus. I have been debating for awhile to buy a used lens. My question is the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 is also...

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

I have read so much about the Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 and its sharp focus. I have been debating for awhile to buy a used lens. My question is the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 is also considered a good choice. Do any hoggers have any hands on experience with these two lens. Thanks as always

Joe

Elsiss Loc: Bayside, NY, Boynton Beach, Fl.

I have the 11-16 and love it. The 11-20 is made just as good, but has slightly more range. You can probably find a used 11-16 very reasonable on eBay or elsewhere, probably less money than the newer 11-20. Either way, they are great choices for crop sensor cameras.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Would the 4mm difference really be discernible?

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

Longshadow wrote:

Would the 4mm difference really be discernible?

Great point big price difference small bang

Thx j

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

Elsiss wrote:

I have the 11-16 and love it. The 11-20 is made just as good, but has slightly more range. You can probably find a used 11-16 very reasonable on eBay or elsewhere, probably less money than the newer 11-20. Either way, they are great choices for crop sensor cameras.

Thx Larry

Raz Theo Loc: Music City

Papa j wrote:

I have read so much about the Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 and its sharp focus. I have been debating for awhile to buy a used lens. My question is the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 is also considered a good choice. Do any hoggers have any hands on experience with these two lens. Thanks as always
Joe

I've used the 11-20 f2.8 for about a year now and have been surprised at the versatility of the lens. Sharp as a tack, even on the rare occasions where I've been stuck with it on my camera (no other lens option), the 20mm end of the lens has been serviceable because an effective crop is easy to achieve.
Hope this helps.

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

Raz Theo wrote:

I've used the 11-20 f2.8 for about a year now and have been surprised at the versatility of the lens. Sharp as a tack, even on the rare occasions where I've been stuck with it on my camera (no other lens option), the 20mm end of the lens has been serviceable because an effective crop is easy to achieve.
Hope this helps.

Thx Raz

deer2ker Loc: Nashville, TN

You can't go wrong with either one. I rented the 11-16 and loved it so much that I bought it as soon as I got home from vacation. Haven't had much time to practice but love the build as well - it is a tank of a lens and very smooth focusing - everything I have shot with it has come out pretty sharp on my D5500.

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

deer2ker wrote:

You can't go wrong with either one. I rented the 11-16 and loved it so much that I bought it as soon as I got home from vacation. Haven't had much time to practice but love the build as well - it is a tank of a lens and very smooth focusing - everything I have shot with it has come out pretty sharp on my D5500.

Thank you

daddybear Loc: Brunswick, NY

Like my 11-16 Tokina. Has a slight learning curve. Quite of few of on the Hog have them and use them.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Papa j wrote:

I have read so much about the Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 and its sharp focus. I have been debating for awhile to buy a used lens. My question is the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 is also considered a good choice. Do any hoggers have any hands on experience with these two lens. Thanks as always

Joe

The Tokina 11-16mm is a very sharp lens... and for a long time was the only choice if you had to have an ultrawide with f/2.8 aperture (most people really don't). But it has its short-comings. First.... and obviously... it has a VERY narrow range of focal lengths. The Tokina 12-24mm f/4 that sold alongside it offered a much wider range of focal lengths, while being approx. the same size and weight.

More problematic is the 11-16mm is VERY prone to flare. Sun or other bright light sources in or near the image area will cause all sorts of veiling flare and ghosts.

Nikon users also need to be aware that the original Toki 11-16mm (and their original 12-24mm) are "motorless" lenses in that mount. No autofocus on a lot of Nikon bodies. Only D7000-series, D500 and up... which have a focusing motor in the camera body... can provide AF with those lenses.

Nikon users who want to use it on a D5000, D3000-series or some other bodies might want the "II" version of either lens, which has a motor built in and will be able to autofocus (in other mounts that were offered there's almost no difference between the original and the II versions of either lens).

The newer Tokina AT-X Pro 11-20mm f/2.8 DX that superseded the 11-16mm solves much of the problems with the earlier lenses. It's a lot less prone to flare, has better contrast and color saturation in challenging lighting conditions AND it has a nicely wider range of focal lengths. It's also a bit larger and heavier (for example, uses 82mm filters while all the other lenses use 77mm). Tokina introduced the 12-28mm f/4 along with it. Both these lenses have built in motors for all mounts offered, including Nikon.

I'd only ask... Do you REALLY need f/2.8? Are you doing a lot of night photography or photojournalism that might call for it? If not, you may want to consider the 12-24mm f/4 or 12-28mm f/4, both of which are considerably less expensive than the f/2.8 lens.

All of them are DX or "crop only" models, designed for use on APS-C sensor cameras. All these Tokina seem very well built. I think they compare well to some premium Canon L-series I've used. My Tokina 12-24mm f/4 reminds me a lot of a Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8L USM that I used in the past.

Like most Tokina lenses, they use a somewhat unusual "focus clutch" mechanism. The focus ring slides slightly forward or backward to switch between manual and auto focus. When set to AF, there's no manual focus override possible (as there is with some systems such as Nikon's AF-S "Silent Wave", Canon's USM "Ultrasonic" and similar HSM from Sigma or USD from Tamron). Disengaging manual focus when set to AF "protects" the lens' micro motor mechanism from possible damage that can occur when that type of focus drive is overridden. (Ultrasonic type focus drive tolerates overriding without concern. I think Tokina has one or two lenses using some form of ultrasonic drive... but most don't.)

Tokina lenses also rotate their focus and zoom rings "Nikon style"... That's the opposite direction of Canon and some others. It's a minor thing, that you may or may not even notice.

BTW: Back when the 11-16mm and 12-24mm were in production, THK (Tokina/Hoya/Kenko) was the parent company of Pentax, too. They never offered any of the Toki lenses in Pentax mount... but "rebranded" several as Pentax and charged almost double for them! Supposedly the Pentax versions used different coatings, but they sure looked identical to me! Now that Pentax is owned by Ricoh, who knows.... As of yet, there aren't any Toki lenses being offered for them. Maybe there's a "non compete" clause in the sale contract.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Papa j wrote:

I have read so much about the Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 and its sharp focus. I have been debating for awhile to buy a used lens. My question is the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 is also considered a good choice. Do any hoggers have any hands on experience with these two lens. Thanks as always

Joe

The 11-20 wins easily in convenience and versatility, it also came out equally good in about all test reviews!

deer2ker Loc: Nashville, TN

I forgot to mention that I have the ATX Pro II version. I don't have a problem with flare and the 11-16 is known for being a fantastic "night sky / star" lens (therefore the 2.8 being helpful I guess - haven't had a chance to do this yet but want to) The key for me is finding that sweet spot and I think that around 14mm is just about perfect!

amfoto1 wrote:

The Tokina 11-16mm is a very sharp lens... and for a long time was the only choice if you had to have an ultrawide with f/2.8 aperture (most people really don't). But it has its short-comings. First.... and obviously... it has a VERY narrow range of focal lengths. The Tokina 12-24mm f/4 that sold alongside it offered a much wider range of focal lengths, while being approx. the same size and weight.

More problematic is the 11-16mm is VERY prone to flare. Sun or other bright light sources in or near the image area will cause all sorts of veiling flare and ghosts.

Nikon users also need to be aware that the original Toki 11-16mm (and their original 12-24mm) are "motorless" lenses in that mount. No autofocus on a lot of Nikon bodies. Only D7000-series, D500 and up... which have a focusing motor in the camera body... can provide AF with those lenses.

Nikon users who want to use it on a D5000, D3000-series or some other bodies might want the "II" version of either lens, which has a motor built in and will be able to autofocus (in other mounts that were offered there's almost no difference between the original and the II versions of either lens).

The newer Tokina AT-X Pro 11-20mm f/2.8 DX that superseded the 11-16mm solves much of the problems with the earlier lenses. It's a lot less prone to flare, has better contrast and color saturation in challenging lighting conditions AND it has a nicely wider range of focal lengths. It's also a bit larger and heavier (for example, uses 82mm filters while all the other lenses use 77mm). Tokina introduced the 12-28mm f/4 along with it. Both these lenses have built in motors for all mounts offered, including Nikon.

I'd only ask... Do you REALLY need f/2.8? Are you doing a lot of night photography or photojournalism that might call for it? If not, you may want to consider the 12-24mm f/4 or 12-28mm f/4, both of which are considerably less expensive than the f/2.8 lens.

All of them are DX or "crop only" models, designed for use on APS-C sensor cameras. All these Tokina seem very well built. I think they compare well to some premium Canon L-series I've used. My Tokina 12-24mm f/4 reminds me a lot of a Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8L USM that I used in the past.

Like most Tokina lenses, they use a somewhat unusual "focus clutch" mechanism. The focus ring slides slightly forward or backward to switch between manual and auto focus. When set to AF, there's no manual focus override possible (as there is with some systems such as Nikon's AF-S "Silent Wave", Canon's USM "Ultrasonic" and similar HSM from Sigma or USD from Tamron). Disengaging manual focus when set to AF "protects" the lens' micro motor mechanism from possible damage that can occur when that type of focus drive is overridden. (Ultrasonic type focus drive tolerates overriding without concern. I think Tokina has one or two lenses using some form of ultrasonic drive... but most don't.)

Tokina lenses also rotate their focus and zoom rings "Nikon style"... That's the opposite direction of Canon and some others. It's a minor thing, that you may or may not even notice.

BTW: Back when the 11-16mm and 12-24mm were in production, THK (Tokina/Hoya/Kenko) was the parent company of Pentax, too. They never offered any of the Toki lenses in Pentax mount... but "rebranded" several as Pentax and charged almost double for them! Supposedly the Pentax versions used different coatings, but they sure looked identical to me! Now that Pentax is owned by Ricoh, who knows.... As of yet, there aren't any Toki lenses being offered for them. Maybe there's a "non compete" clause in the sale contract.

The Tokina 11-16mm is a very sharp lens... and for... (show quote)

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

amfoto1 wrote:

The Tokina 11-16mm is a very sharp lens... and for a long time was the only choice if you had to have an ultrawide with f/2.8 aperture (most people really don't). But it has its short-comings. First.... and obviously... it has a VERY narrow range of focal lengths. The Tokina 12-24mm f/4 that sold alongside it offered a much wider range of focal lengths, while being approx. the same size and weight.

More problematic is the 11-16mm is VERY prone to flare. Sun or other bright light sources in or near the image area will cause all sorts of veiling flare and ghosts.

Nikon users also need to be aware that the original Toki 11-16mm (and their original 12-24mm) are "motorless" lenses in that mount. No autofocus on a lot of Nikon bodies. Only D7000-series, D500 and up... which have a focusing motor in the camera body... can provide AF with those lenses.

Nikon users who want to use it on a D5000, D3000-series or some other bodies might want the "II" version of either lens, which has a motor built in and will be able to autofocus (in other mounts that were offered there's almost no difference between the original and the II versions of either lens).

The newer Tokina AT-X Pro 11-20mm f/2.8 DX that superseded the 11-16mm solves much of the problems with the earlier lenses. It's a lot less prone to flare, has better contrast and color saturation in challenging lighting conditions AND it has a nicely wider range of focal lengths. It's also a bit larger and heavier (for example, uses 82mm filters while all the other lenses use 77mm). Tokina introduced the 12-28mm f/4 along with it. Both these lenses have built in motors for all mounts offered, including Nikon.

I'd only ask... Do you REALLY need f/2.8? Are you doing a lot of night photography or photojournalism that might call for it? If not, you may want to consider the 12-24mm f/4 or 12-28mm f/4, both of which are considerably less expensive than the f/2.8 lens.

All of them are DX or "crop only" models, designed for use on APS-C sensor cameras. All these Tokina seem very well built. I think they compare well to some premium Canon L-series I've used. My Tokina 12-24mm f/4 reminds me a lot of a Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8L USM that I used in the past.

Like most Tokina lenses, they use a somewhat unusual "focus clutch" mechanism. The focus ring slides slightly forward or backward to switch between manual and auto focus. When set to AF, there's no manual focus override possible (as there is with some systems such as Nikon's AF-S "Silent Wave", Canon's USM "Ultrasonic" and similar HSM from Sigma or USD from Tamron). Disengaging manual focus when set to AF "protects" the lens' micro motor mechanism from possible damage that can occur when that type of focus drive is overridden. (Ultrasonic type focus drive tolerates overriding without concern. I think Tokina has one or two lenses using some form of ultrasonic drive... but most don't.)

Tokina lenses also rotate their focus and zoom rings "Nikon style"... That's the opposite direction of Canon and some others. It's a minor thing, that you may or may not even notice.

BTW: Back when the 11-16mm and 12-24mm were in production, THK (Tokina/Hoya/Kenko) was the parent company of Pentax, too. They never offered any of the Toki lenses in Pentax mount... but "rebranded" several as Pentax and charged almost double for them! Supposedly the Pentax versions used different coatings, but they sure looked identical to me! Now that Pentax is owned by Ricoh, who knows.... As of yet, there aren't any Toki lenses being offered for them. Maybe there's a "non compete" clause in the sale contract.

The Tokina 11-16mm is a very sharp lens... and for... (show quote)

Alan thanks for the wealth of info you make great points and I was not aware of the alternate choices . I have a d7000 and 7200 so the af is not an issue. My question is are the 12-24 and 12/28 as sharp as the 11-16 and 11-20. The 2.8 would be helpful for interior work when traveling.

Thx
Joe

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

daddybear wrote:

Like my 11-16 Tokina. Has a slight learning curve. Quite of few of on the Hog have them and use them.

thx