Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 PRO DX Lens for Nikon
Page 1 of 2 next>
Apr 27, 2015 15:09:08   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
I just checked with Tokina USA and this lens started shipping last week. B & H has it listed for $599.00. I'd like to do landscape and star trail photography. Given that it's about half the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, what are your thoughts on Tokina lenses? Neither lens has image stabilization.

Reply
Apr 27, 2015 15:18:46   #
Erik_H Loc: Denham Springs, Louisiana
 
Triplets wrote:
I just checked with Tokina USA and this lens started shipping last week. B & H has it listed for $599.00. I'd like to do landscape and star trail photography. Given that it's about half the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, what are your thoughts on Tokina lenses? Neither lens has image stabilization.

I have two Tokina lenses, the 100mm macro f/2.8 and the 11-16mm 2.8. DX.
Both are great lenses and the 100mm is usually on one of my cameras at all times. The 11-16mm is quite sharp but lens flare can be a problem at times.

Reply
Apr 27, 2015 15:20:15   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
Thanks Erik

Reply
 
 
Apr 27, 2015 15:52:31   #
Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.
 
Triplets wrote:
I just checked with Tokina USA and this lens started shipping last week. B & H has it listed for $599.00. I'd like to do landscape and star trail photography. Given that it's about half the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, what are your thoughts on Tokina lenses? Neither lens has image stabilization.


Erik_H wrote:
I have two Tokina lenses, the 100mm macro f/2.8 and the 11-16mm 2.8. DX.
Both are great lenses and the 100mm is usually on one of my cameras at all times. The 11-16mm is quite sharp but lens flare can be a problem at times.


I have the same two lenses, and echo the exact same thoughts on them.

:thumbup:

Reply
Apr 27, 2015 15:53:16   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
Thanks Don

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 06:06:17   #
warrenvon Loc: Ellicott City, MD
 
I have the Tokina 12-24 f4 and wouldn't trade it for anything. It is very sharp and with excellent color and contrast.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 06:17:18   #
Shadetree Loc: Chattanooga, TN
 
Triplets wrote:
I just checked with Tokina USA and this lens started shipping last week. B & H has it listed for $599.00. I'd like to do landscape and star trail photography. Given that it's about half the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, what are your thoughts on Tokina lenses? Neither lens has image stabilization.


I have a Tokina 12-24mm f4 and it's a fine lens

Reply
 
 
Apr 28, 2015 06:31:24   #
kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy
 
Almost all Tokina wides have pretty hoary CA problems.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 08:10:39   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
Thanks for all the replies folks.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 10:52:10   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
No one has used the new Toki lens, so any comments made have to be taken with a grain of salt.

That said, I currently have a several-year-old Toki 12-24/4 that I use in my Canon kit and it's a good lens. Build quality is excellent, auto focus is fast and quiet, and image quality is very good. I use a Canon 10-22mm too, and that's got even better image quality, but only by a small margin and it's not as well built.

I've used various other Toki models over the years and they are generally good.

CA can typically be corrected in post-processing.

There's not a lot of need for stabilization on an ultrawide. A 10 or 20 or 24mm lens is eminently hand-holdable at slow shutter speeds. Plus, working with this type of lens it's often a good idea to slow down and plan your shots, as you might do when using a tripod.

For astral photography, the older 11-16mm f2.8 Toki has been one of the most popular ultrawides because it's one of the sharpest. However, that lens had such a narrow range of focal lengths and also was more prone to flare. Only time will tell if the new lens superseding it will perform better, as well or worse. It's got an improved range of focal lengths, at least.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 10:56:22   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
amfoto1 wrote:
No one has used the new Toki lens, so any comments made have to be taken with a grain of salt.

That said, I currently have a several-year-old Toki 12-24/4 that I use in my Canon kit and it's a good lens. Build quality is excellent, auto focus is fast and quiet, and image quality is very good. I use a Canon 10-22mm too, and that's got even better image quality, but only by a small margin and it's not as well built.

I've used various other Toki models over the years and they are generally good.

CA can typically be corrected in post-processing.

There's not a lot of need for stabilization on an ultrawide. A 10 or 20 or 24mm lens is eminently hand-holdable at slow shutter speeds. Plus, working with this type of lens it's often a good idea to slow down and plan your shots, as you might do when using a tripod.

For astral photography, the older 11-16mm f2.8 Toki has been one of the most popular ultrawides because it's one of the sharpest. However, that lens had such a narrow range of focal lengths and also was more prone to flare. Only time will tell if the new lens superseding it will perform better, as well or worse. It's got an improved range of focal lengths, at least.
No one has used the new Toki lens, so any comments... (show quote)


Thanks Alan. I knew no one would have actually this particular lens. Just checking on the overall quality of the product. That being said, I see Tokuina also has a 12-28mm f/4 for about $150 less. More focal range but one lees "stop". As a Tokina owner, do you think the 11-20mm is worth the extra money?

I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Regards,

Dennis (aka Triplets)

Reply
 
 
Apr 28, 2015 13:08:43   #
Busch Loc: San Diego
 
Works best on DX body. Not as good on full frame. I had the 11-16. Sold it when I got a D800. Great lens though.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 13:09:24   #
Triplets Loc: Reading, MA
 
Busch wrote:
Works best on DX body. Not as good on full frame. I had the 11-16. Sold it when I got a D800. Great lens though.


Thanks...I'll be using it on D3100.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 20:38:57   #
kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy
 
I much prefer the Sigma 8-16 to the Tokina 11-16. I have both. Much less flare, better CA control and as sharp if not sharper. The extra 3mm make a world of difference. The problem, of course, for astrophotography is the slower aperture, which is probably a deal breaker. I just saw a review of the 11-20 in slr cafe. Very positive, but it was noted that the edges are quite soft at 11mm. Sounds like the 11-16 might be the better choice.

Note that the color fringing associated with CA can be eliminated to some extent in PP or in-camera jpgs, but the associated loss of sharpness cannot, though it isn't a huge deal generally.

Reply
Apr 28, 2015 22:59:46   #
NoSocks Loc: quonochontaug, rhode island
 
Triplets wrote:
I just checked with Tokina USA and this lens started shipping last week. B & H has it listed for $599.00. I'd like to do landscape and star trail photography. Given that it's about half the cost of the Nikon 12-24mm f/4, what are your thoughts on Tokina lenses? Neither lens has image stabilization.


I have the Tokina 16-28 f2.8 and am very impressed with the build quality and the image quality.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.