Opinions needed regarding Tokina 17mm AT-X AF PRO

[Olegis]

I have seen the wonderful review (http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Pontification/b_Photography/d_Tokina_AT-X_17mm/a_Tokina_AT-X_17_mm.html) from Petteri Sulonen and decided to give this lens a closer look, since the widest lens I have is Tamron 28-75 which gives me 45mm on my 10D. As far as I have found on the Web, this lens seems to be the best "bang for the buck" in the wide primes category, as it performs very well under most conditions, well built and costs less than USD$400.
I wonder if anyone has additional opinion about this lens - usage, feel, optical quality, samples etc. [/img]

[drisley]

I've been wondering about a real wide angle lens too.
That same fellow has a review on the Sigma 12-24mm EX lens which he really seems to like.
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/a_Sigma_12-24_f4.5-5.6/a_Sigma_EX_12-24_f4.5-5.6.html

I've been seriously considering this lens, or the Canon 17-40L.

[Olegis]

Hi drisley !
Both the Sigma 12-24 and the Canon 17-40L are out of my reach right now, so I'm looking into more available alternatives. Maybe in the future I'll be able to upgrade, but right now I'm looking for so-called "poor-man" wide angle.

[drisley]

Ah, ok.
I didnt figure the price was much different.
You could always sell me your 70-200F2.8L for $300 and then you would have enough money!
:wink:

There are some pictures from the Tokina here:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tokina/atx_17_af_pro

I wonder if the Tokina offers any better quality than the 300D kit lens at wide angle....

[Olegis]

What's your shipping address ? Send it to me along with your credit card information so I'll be able to charge those $300 ... 8)
Both the Sigma 12-24 and the Canon 17-40 cost about $650-700, that's about $250-300 more than the Tokina 17mm f/3.5 ...

[RbnDave]

I've used the Tokina 17mm for eight months now. I really really like it. It is very sharp and built like a tank. I don't miss having a zoom at wide angles.

Here are a couple samples.
http://www.pbase.com/image/22615637
http://www.pbase.com/image/23799858
http://www.pbase.com/image/25928398
http://www.pbase.com/image/27785249
http://www.pbase.com/image/27785251
http://www.pbase.com/image/27661051
http://www.pbase.com/image/24402831
http://www.pbase.com/image/29367022
http://www.pbase.com/image/26990800
http://www.pbase.com/image/26797972
http://www.pbase.com/image/26778309


Hope that helps.

[Olegis]

Thanks Dave, some wonderful photographs you have on your site - and the Tokina 17mm shows its quality also.
What are your impressions about the use of this lens ? Auto and manual focus ? Weight ? Balance ?

[drisley]

I really LOVE your cow (http://www.pbase.com/image/27660910) shot! Fantastic.

[Olegis]

More opinions please ?

[RbnDave]

Sorry for the slow reply to this thread. I have been out of town for awhile.

As for your questions. I like the handling of this lens. It is not very big or heavy. It is mostly made of metal so it feels rather tough and chunky. I've carried my 10D and Tokina 17mm stapped around my neck to this view point so it can't be too heavy. http://www.pbase.com/image/25927913 I carried it up to here too http://www.pbase.com/image/25927480

The autofocus works well also. It doesn't focus super fast like a canon USM, but it focuses fast enough for me. The manual focus is a little tricky to figure out at first. You have to pull the focus ring inwards to manual focus. It takes a couple minutes to figure out how the system works, but once you figure it out it's really easy. DOF is great at 17mm so focus has never been an issue for me with this lens.

Hope I wasn't too late answering your questions.

[Sailare]

this reply was posted on a similar thread -

Yes, I have one and its a great lens. I have compared shots against the Canon 10-22 as well as the Sigma 15-30, at the 17mm range and its just as sharp if not better. Price is excellent as well.
It's built like a swiss watch and comes in a nice leather bag along with a bayonet hood. The glass is nicely coated and it does not flair easily. Fairly light and compact at about 14 oz. Takes a 77mm filter and the coated ones make the glass look huge! The Focus ring is very smooth in manual mode, but the depth of field is so wide there is no point in taking it out of automatic mode.
Now others have complained about the goofey "snap clutch" system for changing between auto and manual. Once you have figured out how it works it's not a problem and works fine. The Best system in the Canon Ring USM, but that's patented. In order to make the auto focus fast, they "disengage" the ring itself in auto mode to reduce mass. Focus is fast and quite. To go to manual mode turn the ring to one end or the other and pull back on the focus ring while rotating the ring. When it finds the engagement point it "snaps" into place. Feels very positive and solid. I have no problems with it at all. It's just different than Canon. Again at 17mm it never gets used after you play with it a while. I took some close up shots of a chair with vertical slats to see how the Barrel distortion was. None that I could detect. this is a gem of an afordable lens. $ 389 new at B&H, $ 340-$360 range used at KEH.com. I picked up a used but "mint" one, in the $ 265 range. Grab one before it gets discovered and the price goes up to where it should be!

[dharris]

I've been wondering about a real wide angle lens too.
That same fellow has a review on the Sigma 12-24mm EX lens which he really seems to like.
http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Reviews/a_Sigma_12-24_f4.5-5.6/a_Sigma_EX_12-24_f4.5-5.6.html

I've been seriously considering this lens, or the Canon 17-40L.

Why would you consider this lens (17-40) when you already have the 16-35L

[glenhead]

Check the date on the original post - over a year ago. The signature on older posts doesn't stay the same as they were when posted - the sigs are dynamic.

[dharris]

Check the date on the original post - over a year ago. The signature on older posts doesn't stay the same as they were when posted - the sigs are dynamic.

Dur! My bad! I did not see how old this post is. Thanks for pointing this out to me.

[photoshooter]

imgoing to tell my story i bought a Tokina 24 70 2.8 because i do stock car races at night and needed a winners circle lens so i bought it because it was about 300.00 cheaper and just remember you get what you pay for the focus stinks i know own a sigma 70 200 2.8 and a sigma 28 70 2.8 and 2 sigma 50 500 and a Tokina that i use for a anything but pics pay the extra to save your head aches