Tokina AT-X Pro DX 11-20 2.8 Review

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Not big into reviews and I know there are more scientific ways to do this.

Testing is done with a D7100 and D610

After much trial and error decided that a minus one adjustment produced the best focus - this was done with a row of AA batteries as my 'test chart'. Set of five focus on the middle one, then adjust to get the middle one the best. Tested camera about 18" away (minimum focus is about one foot.

Tests were all done hand held.

I did some comparisons to the lens I wanted to upgrade from - an older (as in designed for film I read) Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 It is the SP AF Di LD (IF) version (they ran out of room to put on more initials I think)

Over all the lens works well. Focus is fast enough - not setting speed records but OK. Slight noise, not silent by any means but not too loud.
The push - pull focus ringy thingy is not a selling feature as much as Tokina would like to say it is. I don't like it. It works but meh.
Manual focus is good. It was when I could manual focus better than the auto-focus that I decided that I should try fine tuning the AF.

It is a snug mount - I think it is the weather seal rubber that makes it a tight to mount. It is the tightest mounting lens I've owned. Must be a real good seal.

Good weight in my hands - feels solid enough.

DSC_3730+Tokina ATX 11-20 2.8 DX Pro-0001.jpg
 
Last edited:

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
For testing I decided to shoot my bookcase - text on the spine seemed a good way to test sharpeness - and it was handy.
I used one off camera flash bouncing off the ceiling for lighting.

My "test pattern"
DSC_3722+610 bookcase testing Tokina 20mm F28 FULL-0001 SM.jpg
This is the Tokina 11-20 at 20mm at 2.8

DSC_3728+610 bookcase testing Tokina 20mm 28 top right-0001.jpg
Crop of the top corner - also Tokina 20mm 2.8

And for comparison the Tamron 17-35 at 20mm F3 (would not go to 2.8)
DSC_3727+610 bookcase testing Tamron 20mm F3 TopRight-0001.jpg

I looked at the last book on the edge (Beales of Mississippi)

Here are some other crops of that same corner, First at 11mm then at 14 - ... I'm not happy with these.

DSC_5405+bookcase testing Tokina 11mm F28 Top Right-0001.jpg

DSC_5408+bookcase testing Tokina 14mm F28 Top Right-0001.jpg


Tried to compare at 17mm at 2.8 this takes the Tamron to the max it will do. Combined images in Paintshop.

28 Test Tokina vs Tamron 17mm .jpg

And then again same deal at F4 - there is improvement.
compared top right 17mm F4.jpg

Bottom line - I'm not sure about this lens.
I don't see it as any sharper than my old lens.
It is a DX so mounted on the D7100 11-20 becomes 16.5 - 30 ... I already have 17-35 with the Tamron (on my D610) so this puts a very similar lens on my D7100 with marginal if any improvement in IQ - although it is 2.8 throughout - the Tamron is at F4 by 30mm.
Slight benefit with that. Was I hoping for too much?

I am thinking I made the wrong choice might see if I can take this back and swap for a Nikkor 20mm 1.8 ... Have to try and sleep on that.
 
Last edited:

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Also tried it on the D610
It gives a full frame image from about 16 to 20mm
Old Tamron is sharper on the edges

Tokina DX on an FX D610 at 20mm 2.8
View attachment 252922

Compare the top corner with the old Tamron 17-35

Tokina top corner 20mm 2.8
View attachment 252924

Compare to Tamron
View attachment 252923+

So while it does work there is no point in my case.
IF I did not have anything wider than say a 24mm FX lens and I had one of these I'd use it on my FX body.
 

pforsell

Senior Member
For testing I decided to shoot my bookcase - text on the spine seemed a good way to test sharpeness - and it was handy.

[clip clip removed images]

Bottom line - I'm not sure about this lens.
I don't see it as any sharper than my old lens.
It is a DX so mounted on the D7100 11-20 becomes 16.5 - 30 ... I already have 17-35 with the Tamron (on my D610) so this puts a very similar lens on my D7100 with marginal if any improvement in IQ - although it is 2.8 throughout - the Tamron is at F4 by 30mm.
Slight benefit with that. Was I hoping for too much?

I am thinking I made the wrong choice might see if I can take this back and swap for a Nikkor 20mm 1.8 ... Have to try and sleep on that.

I agree with your findings after seeing these samples. The on-line reviews tend to point in the same direction with comments like sharp in the center but not so great corners, some problems with autofocus, high distortion levels, performance against bright light could be better and huge lateral chromatic aberration.

Also it seems to be a duplicate of your current FX lens on DX body. And if you need to stop down to f/5.6 or f/8 to get decent corners, that kind of defeats the f/2.8 aperture.

Perhaps you could try another sample before writing this completely off?
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Outdoors this morning - another fresh dusting of frosting of snow and grey skys ... aka mother natures hugh diffuser

DSC_5412+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina sm85-0001.jpg
The Tokina 11-20 at wide open 2.8 at 11 mm

DSC_5410+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina minus one AF adjust top left-0001.jpgT
op corner (sort of)
The one with the minus one AF adjust on

This one set AF adjust back to zero
DSC_5412+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina no af adjust top left-0001.jpg

Compared to my old Tamron - on the D610 same settings - no AT adjustining
DSC_3737+610 Backyard F28 17mm Tamron-0001 Top Right.jpg

Hmmmm

How about the centre?

DSC_5412+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina no adjust-0001 Center.jpg

And with Adjust on at minus one ( I don't see a difference this -1 adjust is making)
DSC_5410+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina minus 1 af adjust-0001 Center.jpg


Have to see if this one can be exchanged ?
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Couple more comparisons from this mornings test shot

This is just off centre - again wide open full width to see how wide and fast this lens can go.

DSC_5409+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina minus 1 af adjust-0001+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina Cent.jpg
Tokina


VS old Tamron
DSC_3736+610 Backyard F28 17mm Tamron-0001+610 Backyard F28 17mm Tamron 100 PC-0001.jpg
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
another effort to compare

In this one the Tokina edges out the Tamron - look at the fence detail in the overlay bit - hardly make out the fence on the Tamron but Tokina gets it.




Close up garage comparison.jpg
DSC_5410+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina no af adjust-0001+GATE D7100 Tokina 11mm 28 -0001.jpg
Tokina on D7100

vs

Tamron + D610
DSC_3737+610 Backyard F28 17mm Tamron-0001+GATE 610 Backyard F28 17mm Tamron-0001.jpg

This is the full size of the Tokina - that is a Crop-A-Lot How much Cropping should I expect from an UW?
_DSC_5412+7100 Backyard F28 11mm Tokina sm5mb.jpg


Hmmmm.... to keep or exchange
 
Last edited:

cbay

Senior Member
Sounds like you're on the fence about the lens,,, maybe try another copy? Mine is doing pretty good now. Had to send it in and have the focus adjusted - as i was unable to get it tuned and -20 on both my bodies. I've read about the backfocus issues with this lens. Just got it back last week and it does tune now,, at -17. lol That's ok though as long as it gets the job done. It's a fairly sharp lens (my copy), at longer distances the sharpness does fall off quite a bit, i assume some of this is due to distortion (?).
Hope it works out for you however you go on it.
Have you viewed plenty of samples from this lens online?
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
DSC_4772+Darkeyed Junco-0001.jpg
That's me - on the fence ...

Most of the reviews I had read where very positive - 'such an awesome lens' they said.
But my experience has left me feeling less than awesome-filled.

I decided on a more 'real world' fun test this evening. one of my purposes for this lens is pet photography so I did a photoshoot with our dogs. One an old man - the white maltese and one a fresh new pup - the Yorkie. I let the sleeping dog lie and took a few hundred shots of the Yorkie. I was using two lithium powered bounce flashes. I'll post a few shots in a moment.

And I did find that up close I was getting some good images - in the centre of the frame. But if shot at much of a distance (e.g. ten feet) even if the focal point was right on the subject as you put it the sharpness fell off.

AF was an issue - not as fast as I need. I am a BBF guy and would not give that up, if this lens has BBF issues and I can return it - back it goes. Where did you hear it had BBF issues? Or is that your experience with it?

I'm leaning heavily towards the Nikkor 20mm 1.8 - but have not yet decided - .... I'm still on the fence.

I have a function tomorrow, may give me a real world chance to see how this lens works and whether 2.8 is fast enough for event lighting indoors without flash.

I might pack my 50mm 1.4 Siggy for comparison.
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Real world fun with my new U.W.
May as well play with it while I have it. It may be going back if I can get a refund.
We will see, not back in the city until Monday, time to change my mind, several times.

SM DSC_5454+UWA pet flash fun -0033.jpg
It is shots like this where an UW comes in handy - DOF was low - shooting 2.8

SM DSC_5520+UWA pet flash fun -0024.jpg


"Smile for the Camera"
SM DSC_5589+UWA pet flash fun -0011.jpg


My wife's hobby ...
SM DSC_5699+UWA pet flash fun -0006.jpg
 

cbay

Senior Member
Fortkentdad; Where did you hear it had BBF issues? Or is that your experience with it? I'm leaning heavily towards the Nikkor 20mm 1.8 - but have not yet decided -.[/QUOTE said:
Back focus - not back button focus. I'm all about using back button. The back focus issue - where it focuses beyond where it's supposed to - doesn't appear to be a problem if your battery test in your first post was accurate. It's been reported quite a bit to have back focus issues on the net.
Honestly, i can't help but think you would be happier with the 20mm nikkor. If i shot your type of stuff i would probably be in touch with @Blacktop on here about his 20 that is for sale.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Honestly, i can't help but think you would be happier with the 20mm nikkor. If i shot your type of stuff i would probably be in touch with @Blacktop on here about his 20 that is for sale.
If a 20mm prime would fit the bill, I agree; it would probably be the only the 20mm prime I'd even consider, actually... I've used some U/WA zooms in the past but I don't any more. They all seem to go to varying degrees of "mush" in the corners and/or vignette badly, and I just don't care for that.
...
 
Last edited:

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
I will be taking it back to the shop on Monday - they have the Nikkor 20mm 1.8 in stock (didn't ask but maybe event the Siggy 1.4?) they also have the Tamron 15-30 but that's twice the price almost of the 10-30 - the 20mm Nikon would be about $200 more. They do not have the Tokina in stock -but I can just refund it and look elsewhere for another lens. ... I will be in Calgary on Tuesday - and might get shopping at the camera store.... could happen.
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
I'm going to take this lens back - I checked and I can get a refund.
I may come out with the Nikon 20mm 1.8G - or not.
I'll look at the Tamron 15-30 but at $1600 CDN and given the size of that lens I may pass.

It goes back on Monday . . . any final recommendation?
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
Going to add to my deliberations the Nikon 16-35 F4 ... F4. Hmmm do I need F2.8 ... or F1.8? Nice indoors but at a recent meeting I tried using my Nikon 85 1.8 with a ISO of 1600 to try and get usable shots .... meh - usable yes, great no. So even if I have a 2.8 or 1.8 it is nice that they can take lower light images unaided by flash... but if I was doing any kind of paid shoot I'd use a portable off camera flash system (my Godox set up) and probably want at least F4 to get everyone in focus. ....

Oh I am so good at making decisions .... NOT
 

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
Going to add to my deliberations the Nikon 16-35 F4 ... F4. Hmmm do I need F2.8 ... or F1.8? Nice indoors but at a recent meeting I tried using my Nikon 85 1.8 with a ISO of 1600 to try and get usable shots .... meh - usable yes, great no. So even if I have a 2.8 or 1.8 it is nice that they can take lower light images unaided by flash... but if I was doing any kind of paid shoot I'd use a portable off camera flash system (my Godox set up) and probably want at least F4 to get everyone in focus. ....

Oh I am so good at making decisions .... NOT

Follow my lead: Nikon 16-35/f4 AND Sigma 20/f1.4 ART.

I get more use out of the 16-35 when traveling, but I like having the 20/1.4 at weddings.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
In the end after taking the lens back to the store I was convinced to keep it. Had a chance to have the 11-20, a Nikkor 20 1.8 and Sigma Art 20 1.4 mounted on my D7100 and compare photos taken of me in the store. The Sigma is a touch better, but about $400 more, the Nikkor was ever so slightly better (at 2.8 20mm for comparison) and $170 more. But the difference were slight. It came down to faster aperture vs zoom. Was I more likely to gain from having a lens that would go to 11mm vs one that would shoot at 1.8 or 1.4. I didn't like the size of the Sigma. The compactness of the 11-20 had already proven itself when I was able to put it into a lens case on my belt when hiking in the mountains with my 200-500. I could swap lenses easily enough. The 200-500 hung around my neck as the strap was on the lens not the camera, and I could take wide shots, then put the smaller lens away and go back to the long lens. That worked. It would also work for the Nikkor 20mm as it was not that much bigger. But not the Sigma.

And I still have that 17-35 Tamron 2.8-4.0.

Does not mean a 20mm prime will never happen, just not now. NAS Lens Lust will strike again.
 
Top