Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX First Shots

RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
Ted, like you, I expect most of mine to be outdoors with reasonable light... I do mostly outdoor scenic... (along with night and product)

I have some interior factory stuff but with an iso boost have used what I have or else a 35mm 1.8

I am close to trying to get this.. partly because of your photos and the fact that I will have a wider range once I mount it...

Once last question, how is the sharpness in your opinion?? It looks good from what I can see... (you can peep better on your originals.)


Thanks Ted,

Pat in NH
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
RockyNH said:
Once last question, how is the sharpness in your opinion?? It looks good from what I can see... (you can peep better on your originals.)
Thanks Ted,

Pat in NH
Click to expand...

I am wondering this same question.
The 11-16 gets rave reviews, but some are saying the 12-24 is not as sharp.
To what degree less sharp is what I am wondering, and would I notice the difference.
 
T

TedG954

Senior Member
RockyNH said:
Sometimes there comes a limit.. :) Pat in NH
Click to expand...

"Sharpness" is a subjective term. All I can say is that it appears sharp enough for me. Again, I am more concerned with the overall photo and what it represents. The stairway photos would be the best representatives in this group of photos. Is it sharp enough?

There are always trade-offs.

The 11-16 is sharper. It also costs twice as much.

Personally, I am satisfied with the overall performance of this lens. Would I do it over again? Yes.


PS... I have to add this.

Remember when you got your D5100, with the "kit" lens? Remember how amazed we were with the photographs it produced? I have to ask, "What happened to that amazement?" Here's what happened.... someone told us about sharpness. And soft corners. And barrel distortion. We traded joy for technological perks.

We've all been influenced away from that pure joy of what we take pictures for. We've been sold on keeping up with the Jones'. How far are we going to chase the hype for the perfect photo?

Some people on this forum wouldn't be caught dead with this lens. Others would be excited just to have one for a day.

If I was so concerned with the technical abilities of the camera/lens, I would only use my D800, with high-end Nikon lenses. And I'd always use a tripod. Always. As it is, that's not my concern.

I see photos on this site that are terrible when you consider them only from a technical aspect. BUT.... some of those photos are far better in interest and creativity than the sharpest flower or bug pictures ever posted. It's art vs science. Take your pick. You know which one I've chosen.
 
Last edited:
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Well said. I have had my eye on a Tokina 28-70 AT-X AF F2.8 for a while now. It is just sitting in a local shop, at $275. Though, I also have my eye on a wide angle and a macro, both Tamrons. I see you are a man that goes against the "nikonites" grain, lol. You did not go with the lens that had the highest DXO mark?? Oh, the horror! Keep having fun.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
TedG954 said:
"Sharpness" is a subjective term. All I can say is that it appears sharp enough for me.
Click to expand...
I like that answer.

TedG954 said:
Here's what happened.... someone told us about sharpness. And soft corners. And barrel distortion. We traded joy for technological perks.
Click to expand...
I think it's very easy to confuse numbers with practical significance. Someone reads a DXO review that says Lens X has .01% less chromatic abberation at f/22 when shooting directly into the sun on Wednesdays at 2PM. I'm not even sure how many photographers know what CA is to begin with, yet they'll base a lens buying decision based on this snippet of information.

Same thing goes for 35mm vs. 50mm. Really? Do you realize 15mm equates to taking about three steps, forward or backward, to compensate for? f/1.4 vs. f/1.8? Come on... But these are numbers, and we can wrap our brain around numbers.


...
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
I like that answer.


I think it's very easy to confuse numbers with practical significance. Someone reads a DXO review that says Lens X has .01% less chromatic abberation at f/22 when shooting directly into the sun on Wednesdays at 2PM. I'm not even sure how many photographers know what CA is to begin with, yet they'll base a lens buying decision based on this snippet of information.

Same thing goes for 35mm vs. 50mm. Really? Do you realize 15mm equates to taking about three steps, forward or backward, to compensate for? f/1.4 vs. f/1.8? Come on... But these are numbers, and we can wrap our brain around numbers.


...
Click to expand...

I think what you are talking about is well explained in this article:

Diseases That Plague Photographers

Lot of GAS and LBA around here, lol
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
TedG954 said:
"Sharpness" is a subjective term. All I can say is that it appears sharp enough for me. Again, I am more concerned with the overall photo and what it represents. The stairway photos would be the best representatives in this group of photos. Is it sharp enough?

There are always trade-offs.

The 11-16 is sharper. It also costs twice as much.

Personally, I am satisfied with the overall performance of this lens. Would I do it over again? Yes.


PS... I have to add this.

Remember when you got your D5100, with the "kit" lens? Remember how amazed we were with the photographs it produced? I have to ask, "What happened to that amazement?" Here's what happened.... someone told us about sharpness. And soft corners. And barrel distortion. We traded joy for technological perks.

.
Click to expand...

Hey Ted, I agree with you! Especially about "Subjective", hence my earlier comment "Sometimes there comes a limit" which was in reference to how much sharpness, mpix etc can we normally see in our normal photos..

I wanted your subjective opinion for a reason, see I look at most all of your photos's and I like what I see.. Many cases, I think I wish mine were that good. :) I believe that if you are happy with the purchase that I will likely be also!!

I also believe it is a bargain and surely good quality for the price. Your subjective opinion was "sharp enough for me" and "yes, I would do it again". That tells me to go order one!!

Thanks again for sharing info, comparison photo's and your opinion!!

Pat in NH
 
I

Ironwood

Senior Member
AC016 said:
I think what you are talking about is well explained in this article:

Diseases That Plague Photographers

Lot of GAS and LBA around here, lol
Click to expand...

That was great reading, thanks for posting.
I think everyone gets caught up in one or more of those "Illnesses" at some time, not only confined to photography.
​I can think of similarities in almost every pastime or hobby, golf and fourwheel driving are two that come to mind.
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
Ironwood said:
That was great reading, thanks for posting.
I think everyone gets caught up in one or more of those "Illnesses" at some time, not only confined to photography.
​I can think of similarities in almost every pastime or hobby, golf and fourwheel driving are two that come to mind.
Click to expand...

I also found it a good read Brad!! :)

Pat in NH
 
RockyNH_RIP

RockyNH_RIP

Senior Member
Ok, I ordered mine (12-24 Tokina) today... have confirmation and all... now just waiting to get a ship notice!

Thanks again Ted for the source where you got yours!

Pat in NH
 
Top