Tokina 28-70 f2.8 ATX 270 Pro

[Photo Joe]

I just ordered at Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 ATX 270 Pro lens. From what I gathered, it's an older lens, built like a tank and is a little soft when wide open. I got it used for $160 and thought it was a good deal and didn't want to pass it up, since the 24-70 Nikon lens isn't feasible for me. Anyone else out there have experience with this lens?
Thanks.

 

[Ranie]

I had one before. Im satisfied with its built and IQ. Since its a FF lens, and Im using a DX body, I sold it and got the Nikon 17-55 F2.8
Sweet spot on that lens is on F4.

 

[Photo Joe]

Thanks Ranie. I know the lens is supposed to have some ugly screw on hood, but mine didn't come with one. Do you know of any alternatives?
By the way, I'm also using it on a DX body. It's definitely a solid lens and should hold me over until I put some money away for some Nikon glass like the 17-55 or 24-70 f2.8. Thanks again.

 

[stmv]

wow 160 dollars is a great price, congrats...

Hoods is another of those photo relegious discussion. Personally, I dislike hoods, and have a pile of them in a box, find them a pain when I am getting on and off the lens caps (yes, I like lens caps to keep the dust/dirt off the glass). they make my lens take up too much room in my bag, and no,, I don't get ghosting or sun spots in my photos (know when the condition can exists, and if needed, and those few times that I can see a sun spot or ghost, a simple hand block (keeping of course the hand out of the frame) works just fine versus having to use the hood.

but.... others will swear on the importance of hoods, like I said, its one of those preference things, and they do make your camera look cooler.

so,, if you are not missing the hood, don't worry about not having it.

sounds like a nice lens.

 

[Ranie]

Thanks Ranie. I know the lens is supposed to have some ugly screw on hood, but mine didn't come with one. Do you know of any alternatives?

I believe that the hood is BH773. Its a twist lock hood.
I also have the Tokina 11-16 before and the hood of the 11-16 will fit the 28-70.
You can buy the hood here: BH773 Tokina Hood BH-771 -BH-773 f/20-35's & 28-70/2.6

By the way, the Tokina 28-70 F2.8 has 4 versions. I had the version 3 before

 

[Photo Joe]

wow 160 dollars is a great price, congrats...

Hoods is another of those photo relegious discussion. Personally, I dislike hoods, and have a pile of them in a box, find them a pain when I am getting on and off the lens caps (yes, I like lens caps to keep the dust/dirt off the glass). they make my lens take up too much room in my bag, and no,, I don't get ghosting or sun spots in my photos (know when the condition can exists, and if needed, and those few times that I can see a sun spot or ghost, a simple hand block (keeping of course the hand out of the frame) works just fine versus having to use the hood.

but.... others will swear on the importance of hoods, like I said, its one of those preference things, and they do make your camera look cooler.

so,, if you are not missing the hood, don't worry about not having it.

sounds like a nice lens.

It's a great lens for the value. Thanks for the info

 

[Photo Joe]

I believe that the hood is BH773. Its a twist lock hood.
I also have the Tokina 11-16 before and the hood of the 11-16 will fit the 28-70.
You can buy the hood here: BH773 Tokina Hood BH-771 -BH-773 f/20-35's & 28-70/2.6

By the way, the Tokina 28-70 F2.8 has 4 versions. I had the version 3 before

Thanks for the link and suggestion. I'll check it out. From my understanding and research, I have the Pro I version that is supposedly based on the Anenieux optical formula.

 

[Alex66]

Thanks for the link and suggestion. I'll check it out. From my understanding and research, I have the Pro I version that is supposedly based on the Anenieux optical formula.

If it is the 2.6/2.8 version as in your signature then yes it is and a very splendid lens it is too just very very heavy, some swear its the best version and the Angineux version even now seems to go for £1k ++.

 

[Photo Joe]

If it is the 2.6/2.8 version as in your signature then yes it is and a very splendid lens it is too just very very heavy, some swear its the best version and the Angineux version even now seems to go for £1k ++.

It is heavy, so it does have that old school build quality to it. Did you own the lens?

 

[Alex66]

It is heavy, so it does have that old school build quality to it. Did you own the lens?

Yes I used to have it on Minolta but I prefer primes so did not bother with one in F mount.

 

[Sambr]

I have a Tokina 50-135 2.8 DX awesome lens. I like it a lot

 

[Lee]

Thanks for the link and suggestion. I'll check it out. From my understanding and research, I have the Pro I version that is supposedly based on the Anenieux optical formula.

Well you're the person to give me a review then!

I'm currently watching one of these on auction. It looks like CA is a common problem with the various versions of this lens but the "Angenieux" version seems to come under less criticism in this regard. I've struggled to find reviews on this version of the lens and haven't managed to source any sample images. Any thoughts? I realize that with lenses there are the facts and there there is subjectiveness depending on the user's expectations and needs from the lens. I'm tempted to just go for it so I can try it out, but in the throes of upgrading my camera body this may not be the time to spend unnecessary cash

I'm also holding out for the Nikon 24-70 and will be using this on a DX body too. There just seems to be relatively little information about this lens. I assume there aren't that many copies around?

 

[Photo Joe]

Well you're the person to give me a review then!

I'm currently watching one of these on auction. It looks like CA is a common problem with the various versions of this lens but the "Angenieux" version seems to come under less criticism in this regard. I've struggled to find reviews on this version of the lens and haven't managed to source any sample images. Any thoughts? I realize that with lenses there are the facts and there there is subjectiveness depending on the user's expectations and needs from the lens. I'm tempted to just go for it so I can try it out, but in the throes of upgrading my camera body this may not be the time to spend unnecessary cash

I'm also holding out for the Nikon 24-70 and will be using this on a DX body too. There just seems to be relatively little information about this lens. I assume there aren't that many copies around?

Hi Lee, I was definitely in the same situation you are in. Ideally, I would have loved to get the Nikon 24-70, but when I stumbled across the Tokina 28-70 ATX270 2.6-2.8, I figured I'd take the jump (I think I bought it used for around $170ish). If you can get the lens at a good price, I'd say go for it. It's a solid, heavy piece of equipment that will last many more years to come. I think people are correct in saying that this version is the best of the other 28-70s by Tokina.

It mainly came down to price for me. I am a hobbyist/enthusiast and didn't want to shell out the money for the 24-70. The Tokina produces nice images with good contrast, however I seemed to struggle with it a bit on focus in low light situations such as at a school gym. Sorry, I don't have any photo examples for you at the moment.

Bottom line: It's a great lens if you can get it for a great price. Otherwise, you may want to save for the middle child (24-70) of the Holy Trinity or maybe even go for the Sigma 24-70, which you can buy used for around $725.

 

[Lee]

Well there seems no question about it that the angineux version is considered to be the better of the lot. What a fair price is at this time is a complete unknown to me though because not for want of trying, I cannot find another one to try assess the current resale value of the lens. The one I am watching is double what you paid yours as a starting price and as yet, has no bids. It closes in the morning so I guess I will have to get off the fence during the night and make a decision. At least I can see the seller was telling the truth when he described it as 'rare' - they appear to be like hens teeth. I wonder if there were not many of that version produced? Or do their owners love them that much that they just don't part with them?

What to do, what to do .....

 

[Photo Joe]

Well there seems no question about it that the angineux version is considered to be the better of the lot. What a fair price is at this time is a complete unknown to me though because not for want of trying, I cannot find another one to try assess the current resale value of the lens. The one I am watching is double what you paid yours as a starting price and as yet, has no bids. It closes in the morning so I guess I will have to get off the fence during the night and make a decision. At least I can see the seller was telling the truth when he described it as 'rare' - they appear to be like hens teeth. I wonder if there were not many of that version produced? Or do their owners love them that much that they just don't part with them?

What to do, what to do .....

So what did you decide to do? I think I would have passed on the lens if the seller was trying to unload it for around $400 or so. I'm not quite sure why the lens is so rare, or why Tokina decided to make 4 or so different versions of it (maybe just to confuse us ). It's been a good lens for me, and I'm glad I came across it a few months back in the used listings of one of the big camera store websites. Do you have any other options you're looking at for a mid-range zoom? I've seen Sigma 24-70s 2.8 ranging from $450-$700 used.

 

[Lee]

Well the auction closed before you posted but your advice was spot on nonetheless. I decided to forgo it because from what I can find, he seems a little ambitious in his asking price. He obviously knows his photography and has been using this on FX cameras. There were no bids so I am tempted to message him and say I wanted to bid, directing him to my sourced articles and price recommendations, stating that the price is too high.

I am a little torn. The praise of the capabilities of this lens are going to be very subjective. What appears to be softness and loss of definition and detail is more a case of low contrast. I really like the portraits and I do love shooting portraits - the rendering is almost surreal, as if it was painted or heavily 'noise reduced'. Whether that appeals to a photographer is a matter of preference but I like the classic look it gives.

However in terms of expanding its purpose I am not sure this would serve me as a slightly more general purpose lens. Now I could see from the listing which was very well written and informative, that this was not an all round, walk about lens, so that is not the issue.

I got of to a very slow start with photography a few years ago and it has only been in the last 12 months that I really got out there, got into books and forums and found my feet, so to speak. The result has been finding where my interests lie and it is undeniably
1. Low light/night photography
2. Portaits
3. Wanna be/wish list agenda: I'd love to try out a bit of street photography

I already have a lovely prime lens for portraits and know that ultimately I want the Nikkor 24-70, even with the hefty price tag. My dilemma is now whether to get something middle of the road from a third party to get me by in the meantime, or to save that money towards the lens i really want and wait a little longer. The most expensive items you buy are always the ones you buy twice (ask me about my ND filter - a whole other story!)

So yes, still on the fence on the Tokina as it's not a massive outlay if I use it for a while; but it looks like I might have a harder time selling it than I would a more well known lens. And of course the price is a bit more than it seems to be 'worth' in market value at this point in time.

Off topic, but I have been trying to figure out how to upload images here and cannot seem to get my file resizing right. I had so much help last year and promised to post images but I'm not doing it right

 

[Marcel]

I already have a lovely prime lens for portraits and know that ultimately I want the Nikkor 24-70, even with the hefty price tag. My dilemma is now whether to get something middle of the road from a third party to get me by in the meantime, or to save that money towards the lens i really want and wait a little longer. The most expensive items you buy are always the ones you buy twice (ask me about my ND filter - a whole other story!) <snip>


Off topic, but I have been trying to figure out how to upload images here and cannot seem to get my file resizing right. I had so much help last year and promised to post images but I'm not doing it right

The Nikkor 24-70 is worth the wait, but until the money is there, you could consider the Tamron 28-75 2.8. You can find this one used for around 300-375$.

For the resizing, what post processing program are you using? Are you using a Mac or Window machine? There are many programs you can use. What I find reduces size the best is simply a decrease in resolution. I go for 72 Dots Per Inch and keep files under 900 pixels on the wide side. This should give you files small enough for posting. Just be sure you save the full version in another folder for your personal use if you want to print. Reducing the resolution keeps the files fine for web display but not for printing. This sometimes prevent theft of photos.

It will be nice to see your pictures.

 

[Lee]

Thanks Marcel

Yes, I haven't totally given up on the option of going with the Tamron or Sigma as an interim lens, because they do retain their value fairly well and are pretty easy to shift if I want to trade up at any time.

Regarding post processing, I am using Lightroom 4. I'm really brand new at any kind of post processing and this is my first ever program and attempts so any instructions would need to be simple because I am still working through the program armed with Scott Kelby's LR4 tutorial book, lol.

 

[Marcel]

Thanks Marcel

Yes, I haven't totally given up on the option of going with the Tamron or Sigma as an interim lens, because they do retain their value fairly well and are pretty easy to shift if I want to trade up at any time.

Regarding post processing, I am using Lightroom 4. I'm really brand new at any kind of post processing and this is my first ever program and attempts so any instructions would need to be simple because I am still working through the program armed with Scott Kelby's LR4 tutorial book, lol.

Then in Lightroom, you'll need to export your photo and in the export dialog box specify the resolution or size you want. If your photos are exported to a jpeg smaller than 2mb you'll be OK to upload them here.

Hope this helps.

 

[Lee]

That sounds simple enough. Many thanks
Fortunately LR files seem to export fairly small in size as is, so some may be ok