Tokina wide angle zoom

H

hrphotography

Senior Member
Hello,
I am looking for a wide angle zoom (in $500-700 range). i came across Tokina 17-35mm f4 & 16-28mm f2.8.
Anyone has experience with either of those?
16-28mm is bulkier, is it better in image quality?
i mostly do landscapes. any suggestions?
thank you
 
P

pedroj

Senior Member
I have Nikons 16-35mm F4 and find it to be excellent...I would imagine either of those would be very good...

Google and You Tube it...
 
D

DraganDL

Senior Member
I have recently purchased an used, mint condition Tokina AF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5. Sharp at all apertures, fast and accurate focus - became my favorite lens for Nikons...
 

Attachments

  • tokina.jpg
    tokina.jpg
    99.2 KB · Views: 367
Last edited:
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
TedG954 said:
I think you might be happier with the newer Nikon 18-35.

Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 G Review
Click to expand...

bigal1000 said:
Have to agree here it's a Nikon and in your price range it will hold its value much better than 3 rd party lenses.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with both Ted and bigal1000. If you decide to look at this lens, be aware there is a D version (older) and a more current G version. The newer G lens gets much better reviews overall than the D version. In fact it rates a point or so above the Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lens when mounted on a D610 according to DXO Mark's web site when those 2 Nikon lenses are compared side-by-side. Rick M has many spectacular photos taken with his lens if you search the forum.

Here's a shot with mine:

14238306773_97dc901f1b_o.jpg

Follow Me by *Hark*, on Flickr
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
hrphotography said:
thank you everyone. @hark is 18-35mm sharper than 20mm 2.8 when both are closed down?
Click to expand...

In all honesty I haven't used mine much since getting it repaired last year. I really like the flexibility of a zoom. Take a look at these photos people have uploaded to flickr. Supposedly they are taken with the 20mmD lens.

https://www.flickr.com/search?sort=relevance&text=nikon 20mm AF-D

You will need to decide what features are most important to you. Features such as speed (f/2.8 vs. something slower) or zoom vs. prime. What is your budget? That might help people to narrow down your questions.
 
Vixen

Vixen

Senior Member
I have a Tokina 12-24mm wide angle. I love it. It is nice and sharp (to my eyes at least), and probably, alongside my Nikkor 105mm my favourite lens. I also do a lot of landscape photography but this is also great for other stuff like cars, buildings, flowers....well anything you can get right up close to anyway ;)
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
hrphotography said:
i have 20mm 2.8. just wondering if that zoom is sharper. with landscapes, sharpness across the frame is important to me.
Click to expand...

Typically good primes are sharper than zooms. The new 18-35g @ f5.6 is sharper at 18mm than the 20mm. Some (mostly newer) zooms are sharper than some primes, depends on the lens.

It's the age old problem of IQ vs. convenience, some zooms are closing the gap.
 
H

hrphotography

Senior Member
Thank you Rick. It all started when i saw some awesome images (very very sharp) by a photographer. I asked him about the lens, he told me it was Tokina 16-28 2.8 ($625) and per him that lens is comparable to Nikon 14-24 ($1900). Even if it was close, was good enough for me, as for wide angle i only have 20mm 2.8 which is OK (i was never impressed by its sharpness even at f8). I was about to buy the Tokina 16-28 when i saw another Tokina 17-35 f4 for FX also. That appealed to me more since it was slightly cheaper ($500), smaller, lighter and accepts filters.
So i wanted to ask on this forum if anyone had experience with this particular tokina s. 20mm is wide enough for me, but if i can have a sharper lens (with some zoom perhaps) in my budget ($500-700) i would take it :)
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
hrphotography said:
Thank you Rick. It all started when i saw some awesome images (very very sharp) by a photographer. I asked him about the lens, he told me it was Tokina 16-28 2.8 ($625) and per him that lens is comparable to Nikon 14-24 ($1900). Even if it was close, was good enough for me, as for wide angle i only have 20mm 2.8 which is OK (i was never impressed by its sharpness even at f8). I was about to buy the Tokina 16-28 when i saw another Tokina 17-35 f4 for FX also. That appealed to me more since it was slightly cheaper ($500), smaller, lighter and accepts filters.
So i wanted to ask on this forum if anyone had experience with this particular tokina s. 20mm is wide enough for me, but if i can have a sharper lens (with some zoom perhaps) in my budget ($500-700) i would take it :)
Click to expand...
While the old rule of thumb about primes being sharper than zooms is still true generally speaking there are some striking exceptions. My Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 is one such example, my Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 DC OS HSM is another.

I think it should be pointed out that Tokina lenses often come in two varieties as well: those that come with an internal auto-focus motor and those that come without an internal auto-focus motor. If that feature matters to you be sure you know which variety you're getting. I think the "II" designation indicates the presence of a built-in motor, but I'm not sure that holds true across their product line.

....
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
hrphotography said:
Thank you Rick. It all started when i saw some awesome images (very very sharp) by a photographer. I asked him about the lens, he told me it was Tokina 16-28 2.8 ($625) and per him that lens is comparable to Nikon 14-24 ($1900). Even if it was close, was good enough for me, as for wide angle i only have 20mm 2.8 which is OK (i was never impressed by its sharpness even at f8). I was about to buy the Tokina 16-28 when i saw another Tokina 17-35 f4 for FX also. That appealed to me more since it was slightly cheaper ($500), smaller, lighter and accepts filters.
So i wanted to ask on this forum if anyone had experience with this particular tokina s. 20mm is wide enough for me, but if i can have a sharper lens (with some zoom perhaps) in my budget ($500-700) i would take it :)
Click to expand...

Too bad the Nikon 18-35mm G lens is just outside your budget. It is sharp plus it accepts front filters.

As I stated earlier, I haven't used my 20mm f/2.8D much since getting it repaired last fall, but with what few images I took with it after its repair, I am confident my 18-35mmG is sharper than my 20mmD. Perhaps not all of the 20mm f/2.8D lenses are tack sharp? I still want to mount it on a tripod to see just how sharp it can go, but with handholding I'd say my 18-35mmG is the winner.

Good luck with whatever you get. :)
 
B

bigal1000

Senior Member
hrphotography said:
Thank you Rick. It all started when i saw some awesome images (very very sharp) by a photographer. I asked him about the lens, he told me it was Tokina 16-28 2.8 ($625) and per him that lens is comparable to Nikon 14-24 ($1900). Even if it was close, was good enough for me, as for wide angle i only have 20mm 2.8 which is OK (i was never impressed by its sharpness even at f8). I was about to buy the Tokina 16-28 when i saw another Tokina 17-35 f4 for FX also. That appealed to me more since it was slightly cheaper ($500), smaller, lighter and accepts filters.
So i wanted to ask on this forum if anyone had experience with this particular tokina s. 20mm is wide enough for me, but if i can have a sharper lens (with some zoom perhaps) in my budget ($500-700) i would take it :)
Click to expand...

Sorry I can't agree with him whoever him is about Tokina vs Nikon 14-24!!!!!!!
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
Horoscope Fish said:
While the old rule of thumb about primes being sharper than zooms is still true generally speaking there are some striking exceptions. My Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 is one such example, my Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 DC OS HSM is another.

I think it should be pointed out that Tokina lenses often come in two varieties as well: those that come with an internal auto-focus motor and those that come without an internal auto-focus motor. If that feature matters to you be sure you know which variety you're getting. I think the "II" designation indicates the presence of a built-in motor, but I'm not sure that holds true across their product line.

....
Click to expand...

I have the Tokina 11-16 version with the internal focus motor "ii" on the way. I hope it is as good as I have heard the it is. We will see next week.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Don Kuykendall said:
I have the Tokina 11-16 version with the internal focus motor "ii" on the way. I hope it is as good as I have heard the it is. We will see next week.
Click to expand...
The lens itself I find to be superb; very sharp with excellent color and contrast. I also think it's one of, if not THE single, most difficult lens I have to use WELL in a creative sense.

I look forward to hearing your thought's on it!

...
 
Top