Difference between Tokina Zooms [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

View Full Version : Difference between Tokina Zooms

davkenrem

27th of July 2004 (Tue), 19:02

openspace

27th of July 2004 (Tue), 20:19

In every lens test I have ever reviewed, the AT-X Pro and AT-X Pro II test sharper than tha AT-X Pro SV.

Basically, the AT-X SV is the newest lens of the bunch, and an attempt by Tokina to create a lighter weight fast zoom. They claim breakthroughs in manufacturing technology allowed then to cut the weight and nearly halve the price of the lens as compared to the original.

But in this case, the newer lens is not an improvement on the older one. While well built, it just isn't up to snuff on sharpness and clarity. I suspect this is why Tokina is still manufacturing the "old" version, the AT-X 280 Pro.

I shoot with an old version of this lens (a 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro) and I love it. Is is sharp, built like a tank and weather proof. But if it were to break, there is no way I'd replace it with the new SV!

Personally, if I was looking to buy a fast wide-angle zoom today, I'd look at the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di ($349 at B&H). Although I have never used it, I have heard it is tack sharp. In fact, Photozone.de lists it as the 3rd sharpest of all the available f/2.8 wide-angle zooms, just behind to two Canon L's. Check out http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm for the full test report

RDKirk

28th of July 2004 (Wed), 17:12

Hello Friends,

I wonder if any of you knowledgeable folk know the difference between these five different variants of Tokina Lenses?

Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X
Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SV
Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro
Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro II
Tokina AF 28-80mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro

What is the difference between the 5 and which is the best of the bunch.

I have the Tokina AF 28-80mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro, which Tokina classes as the best of the group, and it's been tested as the best by every source I've seen.

However, all the Tokinas represent "last generation's" pre-digital technology. The 28-80m AT-X Pro was one of the best when it was introduced, but it's 'way behind now at f2.8 and f4.0 In addition, it is VERY vulnerable to increased flare levels at f2.8 with digital sensors (digital sensors reflect far more light than lens--one of the differences of "digitally enhanced lenses is that they have multicoated rear elements to fight the increased mirrorbox flare). It is a heavy sucker, but I doubt that will actually help it survive a fall any better than the Tamron; it's heavy enough, though, to make a real difference if you carry it all day.

I have the Tamron 28-75 DI, and I would argue that the Canon L in its length is not any better in optical quality or freedom from flare. Canon L trumps it in build features--enviromental sealing, USM focusing (more silent and faster), probably more reliable in the very long run--but not in optical quality. I'd rather have three Tamrons.