Drisley you actually talked me out of L glass!

[timmyquest]

Your photos from the 17mm lens have driven me to buy that and keep the remaining money in my account to buy the 100-400 in time for baseball.

Shocking ehh!

[drisley]

:oops:
Imitiation is the ultimate form of flattery. 8)
Timmy, that was exactly my thinking. I'm not normally a wide angle shooter, but it's good to have a wide angle lens for when you need it.
I saved about $500cdn getting the Tokina vs the 17-40L, and I couldnt be happier with the quality.
And now, I can put that money towards something on the very long end (I've got my eye on the 300F4 IS), and maybe food and rent.

[Persian-Rice]

:oops:
Imitiation is the ultimate form of flattery. 8)


Or in your case, insanity. hahahaha :wink:

[nat869]

I am almost talked out of the 17-40 as well. The Tokina images are pretty sweet. Maybe next year :roll:

[timmyquest]

The thing is that the shots i took with my bosses 17-40 really wernt all that impressive. They were sharp no doubt, they just didnt have that L "pop" that i'm use to.

Infact i felt the 50mm f/1.8 has a nicer image. I just think it's hard tog et that look out of a WA lens. That dramatic difference between "L" and "non L"

The only reason i'm sure it'll eventually make it into my bag is the build quality, that is one thing i've yet seen beaten and that is L series build quality.

[drisley]

Yes, wide angle is VERY hard to get good optics, even L glass.

As far as build quality goes, the Tokina is just as good as my 135F2L.
The only place the L is better is the USM focus. However, for a wide angle lens, this isn't a big deal (since the DOF is so large).
And, the focus speed and sound of the Tokina is much better than the 50F1.8II. I would say it lies somewhere between a Canon consumer lens, and an L lens.
When manual focusing, the focus ring on the Tokina is the best I've used...smooth as butta!
Trust me, this lens is built like a tank! Some say it is actually built BETTER than Canon L glass. I wouldn't go that far, but it is very, very close.

And don't forget. The Tokina comes with a 3 YR warranty. The L glass only comes with a 1 YR warranty.

[roanjohn]

Drisley - How does the color and contrast of the Tokina lens compares to the Canon L?? Do you notice any color cast etc??

I am now in the process of buying a new camera and I might consider this lens for wide angle and etc...........the 17-40 at this point will just go beyond my budget :-( darn!!!

Ro1

[drisley]

Actually, I don't notice any real colour cast at all.
If there is, it's very slight.
From what I've seen the Tamron 28-75mm lens has a very noticable warm cast which is MUCH more noticable than anything the Tokina lens produces.
Even the excellent 135F2L, for example, has a *slightly* warm colour balance (which I think is one reason portraits from this lens look so great).

For somebody that doesn't need a wide angle zoom, and wants to save money and get a lens that's built like an L, there really isn't anything out there but the Tokina. It really is in a class of it's own.
I posted a picture taken with the Tokina 17mm, and then with the 50F1.8II as a comparison here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=46895&highlight=tokina+17mm).
Both were taken at the same aperture (f11), exposure, etc.
I see no difference in contrast or colour balance.

[roanjohn]

Thanks Drisley!!! That shot looks good!!!

Ro1

[snibbetsj]

I spent the better part of 2 months debating over the 17-40L and Tamrons 17-35 Di. I ended up buying the 24 F2.8 and am quite happy with it. If I need to go wider, I know the Tokina will make it into my bag. :)

Jeff

[booggerg]

How much comparison can you make from resized and processed pictures?

[timmyquest]

How much comparison can you make from resized and process pictures?

All the comparison i need.

**EDIT**

As i clicked "post" i thought to myself "i bet booggerg has a 17-40" Sure enough when i looked in your sig it was there.

[booggerg]

but if you view the top of the forum, you'll see my post questioning the quality of the 17-40.

Your comment doesn't answer my legitimate question. How can anyone deduce the quality of a lens from a resized, USMized picture?

[drisley]

How can anyone deduce the quality of a lens from a resized, USMized picture?
Well, since the question was about contrast and colour, you can deduce LOTS from a resized and USMed image.
If the question was about detail, then the resized image may not be the best solution (although, I find the detail on the Tokina to be very good).
Another thing to note from those two pictures... the 50F1.8II produced much more flare than the Tokina. The Tokina is supposed to be the best wide angle lens around when it comes to flare resistance.

[booggerg]

contrast in the sense of light and dark ratio isn't an applicable descriptor for optical quality. Contrast when talking about lenses, refers to the ability of the lens to differentiate minute consecutive details.

[timmyquest]

Your comment doesn't answer my legitimate question.

I think i did. I dont think i've ever seen a wide angle lens under 20mm that looks that much more better then any other except for contrast.

Take the 18-55 kit lens on the rebel, i feel the contrast from that lens is horrid, i have plenty of photos to prove it.

Based on the photos from drisley so far i feel that this lens is up to par as far as my needs for a contrasty sharp wide angle image.

It really doesnt matter to me too much how much post proc. he had to do to the image. I can can tell when an image is printable and when an image is not.

Do a search with my name on the sigma 70-300 and you will see find some shots that are not printable or fixable in PS.

[roanjohn]

In terms of sharpness, the result should be prime > zoom.

The only factor that makes me hesitate in buying a 3rd party lens are #1 Compatability with future bodies. #2 Resell value, and most importantly #3 Yellow color cast.

I think this lens has lived up to its name in terms of build and image quality. Lets see if I end up purchasing it. I may have to try it out first though.

Ro1

[drisley]

Well, the main concern here is colour cast, and any size image will do.
As far as contrast, I've seen 100% crops from the 17-40L, and the contrast and detail very similar to the Tokina.
From everything I've seen from the Tokina 17mm ATX Pro and Canon 17-40L I've concluded the following:

Build: Tie (both lenses are built like tanks. the usm gives the 17-40L a slight advantage, but the Tokina focusing is also very fast. The manual focus ring on the Tokina is actually much smoother)
Sharpness: SLIGHT edge to the 17-40L (maybe)
Contrast: Tie
Colour: Tie
Focal Length: Canon wins of course because it's a zoom
Price: Tokina is half the price of the Canon
Warranty: Tokina has a 3 yr warranty (vs 1 yr for the canon)

It's really a matter of personal preference. If you feel you need flexibility of a zoom and dont mind paying twice as much, the Canon 17-40L is the way to go.
If you prefer a prime and want to save big money, the Tokina is the way to go. I fall into the latter category.

[roanjohn]

Don't forget........the Canon is weather-sealed..............I am not so sure about the Tokina............ :?

I'm sure everybody has seen this review, but for those who hasn't, here it is:

http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Pontification/b_Photography/d_Tokina_AT-X_17mm/a_Tokina_AT-X_17_mm.html

One thing I like is the lack of barrel distortion. I am not too crazy about the fringing though.............Drisley - is that a common occurance from your experience??

Ro1

[Persian-Rice]

Roanjohn, although I agree with the weather sealing, the majority of people dont have sealed camera's.

As for the fringing, that is one reason this lens came of my list......I was considering this lens a very long time ago.

[timmyquest]

Roanjohn, although I agree with the weather sealing, the majority of people dont have sealed camera's.


I do, which is why the 17-40 may still very well make it into my bag.

We'll see, i'm not buying until the end of December

[drisley]

I haven't noticed any major fringing at all.
Put it this way, my 85F1.8 USM has more fringing than the Tokina.
My old 18-55mm kit lens had WAY more fringing than the Tokina.
Oh, and if you read that review carefully, it mentions that although the Tokina has some fringing, it's still better in that department the the Canon wide angle L zooms (ie 17-40L).

Since my 20D isn't weather sealed, I'm not concerned about the lens being weather sealed.

To help things a bit I've put a 100% crop for you to view for yourselves HERE (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/MG_3379.jpg).

No extra sharpening or post-processing.
This is straight out of EVU at default values, except that I added +1 exposure comp as I accidentally underexposed the image slightly (hence the noise).
This image was shot at ISO400, F5, 1/2s, 17mm(exif attached).
I used F5 as it wasn't wide open, but it wasn't stopped down any crazy amount either. I think this gives a good idea of what to expect with this lens.
The lighting was mixed (sunlight and tungsten) so I did my best to create a custom WB. I definately need to get a gray card though. :wink:
I've taken a similar test shot when I had the 300D with kit lens, and the quality with the Tokina is MUCH better.
All I can say is I really am happy with this lens.

[roanjohn]

Ok - that is pretty amazing!!! I don't think the Canon zoom will be that sharp at f5.

[drisley]

As far as fringing goes, this is probably the worst case I could find.
Still looks pretty good to me.

IMAGE (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/MG_2982.jpg)

This is 100% crop, shot at F4, ISO800 with NO sharpening (I used DPP for this one with sharpening turned off).

[Olegis]

Well drisley, I started to have all kinds of thoughts about this lens. I mean - I'm happy with my Sigma 15-30, but the Tokina is much smaller lens. Recently a size became an issue, because I want to use a much smaller bag for everyday shooting, with a 10D body and maximum two lenses, 50mm f/1.8 (or 100mm Macro, or Tamron 28-75 f/2.8) and some wide angle. The Sigma 15-30 would be too big to fit such a bag ... :?

[drisley]

:lol:
Yeah, size was a BIG factor for me too. I had only enough room left in my Tamrac Velocity 9 for something around the size of the 18-55mm kit lens. So, this was nice.
However, that Sigma 15-30mm is such a nice looking lens. I absolutely love that focal range. And the pictures you've taken with it are so nice.

Currently in my Velocity 9 I can fit all of my kit...
20D, 17mm ATXPro, 50F1.8II, 85F1.8, 135F2L, EF1.4x, 420EX, all lens hoods, Rocket Blower, CF Cards, 2x BP-511 batteries, spare batteries for flash, cleaning supplies.

[Olegis]

Thanks :-)

I wish there was a 12-24mm lens with slightly wider aperture than that of the current Sigma lens, the 4.5 is just too dark for me ...

But the Tokina looks just right for my needs, I just may end up buying it and leaving the Sigma in my bigger bag :wink:

[roanjohn]

Drisley - I think you started a trend here :D .

Ro1

[nosquare2003]

Trust me, this lens is built like a tank!

I have never done any lens test nor comparison. My friend did. He dropped my "tank" in a distance of 3-4 feet. And it survives (but not the hood).

[Olegis]

Drisley - I think you started a trend here

He always does ... :lol:

[drisley]

Drisley - I think you started a trend here
He always does ... :lol:

Hmm, yeah, that does seem to happen. :o
Perhaps I am a little too over enthusiastic about equipment I buy.
I must stop that! :oops:

I must say that I hope I dont sound like I'm bashing the 17-40L.
I'm just very happy to find a wide angle lens that offers good quality, great build, good size, and GREAT price.
It was almost as if I told Tokina exactly what I wanted in a wide angle lens, and they built this lens just for me. It's absolutely a perfect wide anlge lens for my needs.

[Olegis]

Perhaps I am a little too over enthusiastic about equipment I buy.
I must stop that! :oops:


I think we all are. 8)

[timmyquest]

In typical Timmy-Pre-Purchase fashion i have "flip-flopped" and am now going to get the 17-40.

No fears, that opinion will change in the next 48 hours. The winner of this debate will be the one i feel is best at the exact moment of maximum bank-account-fullness.

:roll:

[roanjohn]

Thats it .....I concede !!! :lol:

Ro1

[drisley]

The winner of this debate will be the one i feel is best at the exact moment of maximum bank-account-fullness.
:roll:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: