Tokina SD 11-16 F2.8 (IF) DX
Jun 1, 2014 12:33:04 #
I have been thinking about getting a wide or Ultra Wide lens and have been reading a lot about the Tokina 11-16 DXII f/2.8 and the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6. If money were no object I'd probably buy a new Sigma. However, I have a possible opportunity to but the previous version of the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. This is the DX, not the newer DXII. However, this used lens is in excellent condition and the asking price is only $350. I'm thinking this might be a good Ultra-Wide to start with and I could always sell it later and upgrade if I felt is won't doing all that I need. I know the newer version has better coatings and a better focus motor. Does anyone have experience with this lens and is $350 sound like a good deal?
Jun 1, 2014 20:33:07 #
Tokina have two ultra wide angle lenses, a 11-16mm f2.8, & a 12-24mm f4. I use them both on my D7100 & speak highly of both. Both lenses are tack sharp. The 11-16 is a stop faster, but the 12-24 has a larger zoom range. You can't go wrong with either lens. The used one sounds like a good buy.
Jun 1, 2014 20:34:14 #
Jun 1, 2014 20:40:21 #
Basil wrote:
No, it's not new and its the previous version (not the DXII).
Our comments 'crossed in the mail'. My 11-16 is the 'old' model--still a good lens, though. The used lens is still good value, IMO.
Jun 1, 2014 21:19:31 #
The used lens at $350 is a pretty good deal. I have one and paid $580 for it new about a year ago. Very happy with the lens and I use it often.
Jun 1, 2014 22:31:49 #
Erik_H wrote:
The used lens at $350 is a pretty good deal. I have one and paid $580 for it new about a year ago. Very happy with the lens and I use it often.
Is the one you bought the new DX II or the previous DX version?
Jun 1, 2014 23:07:22 #
Mine is the older DX version. The new DXII is the same thing with a built in focus motor and they claim that it has slightly better coating. If your cameras have a focus motor, I think you would be quite happy with the first generation and saving some money.
Jun 1, 2014 23:21:40 #
Mine is a Canon 7D so it doesn't have a built-in focus motor. I guess that means the older Tokina lens would not work for me?
Jun 1, 2014 23:38:10 #
I have the older version and I think it's a great lens. The only con is that the lens is very prone to flair and it's extremely necessary to use a lens hood when shooting in bright light. Other than that, the lens is tack sharp and focus is smooth and quick. Great wide angle capability.
Basil wrote:
Mine is a Canon 7D so it doesn't have a built-in focus motor. I guess that means the older Tokina lens would not work for me?
Jun 1, 2014 23:47:21 #
PVR8 wrote:
I have the older version and I think it's a great lens. The only con is that the lens is very prone to flair and it's extremely necessary to use a lens hood when shooting in bright light. Other than that, the lens is tack sharp and focus is smooth and quick. Great wide angle capability.
But does your camera have built-in auto-focus? I'm hearing the older version lens doesn't have built-in focus motor hence will only work with cameras that have built-in focus? My 7D, I'm fairly certain, doesn't have it's own focus motor, hence I'm guessing the older version would not work for me.
Jun 2, 2014 01:03:13 #
Jun 2, 2014 07:31:58 #
I have the lens you are considering and use it with a Canon 7D and it works just fine. Auto focus is no problem as long as the switch on the lens is set to auto focus. Yes, flare can be a problem if you are shooting anywhere close to the direction of the sun, but will be the case with any wide angle lens.
The one thing is miss on this lens is there is no IS. You must use a tripod or shoot at a fairly high speed.
If the lens is in good shape, it sounds like a great deal.
Bill P
The one thing is miss on this lens is there is no IS. You must use a tripod or shoot at a fairly high speed.
If the lens is in good shape, it sounds like a great deal.
Bill P
Jun 2, 2014 08:49:11 #
Basil wrote:
I have been thinking about getting a wide or Ultra... (show quote)
For starters, there is no real advantage to the new version over the old version optically, according to lenstip.com. I have both this lens (version 1) and the Sigma 8-16. The Tokina lens is quite sharp, but it has two Achilles heels: work against the light and chromatic aberration. These were a big problem for me, and after I bought the Sigma I never again used the Tokina.
If you shoot against the light you need to be aware that the Tokina is trouble. It produces a lot of flare artifacts: not only a large comet and series of smaller ones, but large concentric rings in some situations that are basically impossible to edit out. Bright light sources also degrade the contrast quite noticeably, as can be seen below. I did an informal shoot at Asakusa Temple in Tokyo. The first shot is with the Tokina @ 11mm. Compare it to the next, the Sigma @ 11mm. Then have a look at the difference in FOV that those extra three millies give you, with the Sigma @ 8mm.
Both lenses suffer from some CA off axis, and more when defocused off axis, but the situation is quite a bit worse with the Tokina. Of course this can be cleaned up in post, but you can't get the sharpness back.
In terms of sharpness both lenses are very good in the center. The Sigma is definitely superior in the corners (at equivalent apertures), however this is probably not a big deal to most people. It is noticeable at 50% and above.
Mechanically both lenses are good. Tokina version 1 has no built in motor, so it is rather slow, but not really that much worse than the Sigma (if you have a camera that can handle it: do you?)
One advantage of the Sigma is that you can manual focus in AF mode. The focus mode on the Tokina v.1 is controlled by a clutch, and in AF mode no MF is possible. Also, the Sigma has a much closer minimum focusing distance than the Tokina.
On the plus side for the Tokina, it accepts filters, and has a fixed max aperture of f2.8.
If you can live with the limitations of the Tokina it is a very good lens, but if you intend to use your UWA against the light, you should really think twice about the Tokina. Please also read the reviews of those lenses at photozone.de and lenstip.com
HTH
Jun 2, 2014 09:22:13 #
Kymarto, thanks for the insight! I didn't even know about the Sigma UWA until you mentioned it in a previous post. Since then I've been going back and fourth between the Sigma and the Tokina. I don't do a lot of shooting into the sun, so that probably isn't a huge consideration for me. Also, CA can be fixed in PP, so that's not a huge concern for me either. So for me, the decision comes down to 1) cost and 2) whether I would rather have f2.8 (which would have come in handy yesterday when I was taking pictures inside an old Spanish church where lighting was poor) or, would I rather have the extra 3mm (which, in looking at your example, is pretty impressive). I also like the fact you can use manual focus on the Sigma while in AF mode. I think the edge goes to the Sigma, all else considered, but then it's $125 more than the Tokina. I can see where both would be better in different situations. If the Sigma was also f2.8 it would be a much easier decision.
Jun 2, 2014 10:02:25 #
I have the newer version of the Tokina. If your camera doesn't have a built in motor the older version will not auto - focus but everything else will work fine. Unless you are shooting into the general direction of the sun you shouldn't have too much problem with CA if you use the hood. I had a Sigma 8-16 but traded it in because I found the very slow maximum aperture to be more of a problem. I did like it's extreme wide angle, but after trying to use it for a wedding reception without a flash (flash not allowed), I had to give up on it. The Tokina is a very well built lens (so is the Sigma) that I think you will appreciate more if you need to do any shooting in dimly lit areas.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.