Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 [Archive] - Page 16 - Canon Digital Photography Forums

quattroatl

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 14:00

And is nowhere near as sharp as the Tokina

I have both lenses, and the 17-40 is plenty sharp on my 5D2 and 7D.

The colors from the 17-40 is also more pleasing and accurate compared to the tokina 11-16.

Without question there is a cult following and praising of the toki 11-16, but sometimes people tend to be somewhat fanboy-ish about this lens.

jacobsen1

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 14:16

Without question there is a cult following and praising of the toki 11-16, but sometimes people tend to be somewhat fanboy-ish about this lens.

agreed, but I'd still agree with this:

You made the right choice. 17-40L isn't wide enough on a crop-sensor body.

IMHO, the canon 10-22 (which costs the same and is lighter) is a better landscape lens. Just as sharp once stopped down and MUCH better flare handling. Plus wider and longer? All wins. If you need 2.8 the tokina is great, but yeah, it flares BAD....

newporthomie

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 14:18

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5180/5389459931_ae86872285_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5389459931/)
IMG_4377 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5389459931/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

CaptainTonus

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 15:33

IMHO, the canon 10-22 (which costs the same and is lighter) is a better landscape lens. Just as sharp once stopped down and MUCH better flare handling. Plus wider and longer? All wins. If you need 2.8 the tokina is great, but yeah, it flares BAD....

The 10-22 is a great lens, but the build quality leaves a LOT to be desired. I can deal with the flare issues no problem, having the 2.8 is what it's all about, especially when you're doing a lot of night photography. The Toke blows the Canon away in this department.

And is nowhere near as sharp as the Tokina

I have zero issues with my images being too soft for my liking, and if one happens to appear soft, that's nothing a little PP can't fix. There's a reason these lenses are consistently sold out everywhere...

rjx

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 16:07

Without question there is a cult following and praising of the toki 11-16, but sometimes people tend to be somewhat fanboy-ish about this lens.
I am definitely not a fanboy (and just for the record I do not pixel peep). Actually thinking about selling the 11-16 for a different UWA with a little more length.

I have seen amazing images taken with the 17-40 on both crop and FF camera's. But when it comes to sharpness, I can spot differences from time to time depending on the subject and composition of how the 17-40 lacks in the sharpness department.

Both lenses have limitations and both lenses takes great images.

I'm just calling it the way "my eyes" see it and I think the Tokina 11-16 is one of the sharpest uwa zoom lenses that accepts filters. It will be a shame when I go FF (if I still own the 11-16) since I am not sure I want to slap a 1.4x on it so I can use it on the 5D. Instead, I have the Nikon 16-35 f/4 w/ Canon adapter in mind since I am not as impressed as I would like to be about Canon's 16-35 and 17-40.

hairy_moth

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 16:11

Without question there is a cult following and praising of the toki 11-16, but sometimes people tend to be somewhat fanboy-ish about this lens.

Every lens I own has a fanboy following! :cool:

rjx

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 16:34

There's a reason these lenses are consistently sold out everywhere...
Also because there is less competition for UWA zooms on Canon FF camera's in that price range (17-40 being the cheapest). Canon 17-40, Tokina 16-28, Sigma 12-24.

matthew.saji

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 16:50

I am definitely not a fanboy (and just for the record I do not pixel peep). Actually thinking about selling the 11-16 for a different UWA with a little more length.

I have seen amazing images taken with the 17-40 on both crop and FF camera's. But when it comes to sharpness, I can spot differences from time to time depending on the subject and composition of how the 17-40 lacks in the sharpness department.

Both lenses have limitations and both lenses takes great images.

I'm just calling it the way "my eyes" see it and I think the Tokina 11-16 is one of the sharpest uwa zoom lenses that accepts filters. It will be a shame when I go FF (if I still own the 11-16) since I am not sure I want to slap a 1.4x on it so I can use it on the 5D. Instead, I have the Nikon 16-35 f/4 w/ Canon adapter in mind since I am not as impressed as I would like to be about Canon's 16-35 and 17-40.

Will the Tokina 11-16 work on the full frame 5D?

B.I. Photography

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 17:14

Will the Tokina 11-16 work on the full frame 5D?

if im not mistaken its for crop body only (1.6)

ride5000

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 17:19

but yeah, it flares BAD....

i've seen a hell of a lot worse. i don't find it to be that big of a problem.

Will the Tokina 11-16 work on the full frame 5D?

yes, up to 14.5mm. i have many photos up on flickr. search for "full frame" and "tokina."

rjx

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 17:43

Will the Tokina 11-16 work on the full frame 5D?
You can, only towards the end of the focal range (15-16mm) w/o any major vignetting.

If you use it with a TC, you get 15.4-22.4 focal range on FF.

keluangman

26th of January 2011 (Wed), 20:40

ride5000

27th of January 2011 (Thu), 05:44

I owned this 11-16 before for 7 month approx, and the main reason i bought it becoz of f2.8, built quality and came with hood. The toki was produced superb image quality, but it' always lack with front and back focusing with my 40D and 7D, and accidentally recorded the ugly AF sound when I shoot video for wedding ceremony. So now, the toki already sold and replace it for 10-22mm. Actually the ugly sound, the CA and flare, does not harm me anything, but the real main problem is backfocusing. Well, its not worth for me if I got the super high quality built, the sharpest optical glass, the heavyweight UWA lens in its class but I didn't focus at where you point it. The f2.8 are very good for low light situation but it can't beat the priority of focusing point accuracy, therefore, the f2.8 goes to f3.5 just only 1 stop if lowlight source, and 2 stop in highlight source.

interesting that you even noticed focus issues to begin with, since the DOF is naturally quite wide due to the focal length.

after kissing the floor a year and a half ago, my AF has been broken. all of the shots i've taken since then are manual focus only. occasionally i will employ the focus confirmation beep when shooting from the hip, but most are either eyeball focus through the viewfinder or preset focus from the hip. since using the lens on full frame for the last half year or so i have noticed that the focus is (as expected) much more critical.

as you might imagine i've gotten considerably better at estimating distance to subject and setting the focus via the distance scale. ;)

newporthomie

27th of January 2011 (Thu), 14:15

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5393616690_c161610cd6_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5393616690/)
ourflag2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5393616690/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

thatkatmat

27th of January 2011 (Thu), 21:51

The 10-22 is a great lens, but the build quality leaves a LOT to be desired. I can deal with the flare issues no problem, having the 2.8 is what it's all about, especially when you're doing a lot of night photography. The Toke blows the Canon away in this department.

I couldn't stand the 11-16 for night photography...The flare is so out of control it's ridiculous....Maybe having 2.8 is great for some, but at night, I use long shutter speeds so I'm usually up around f8 or so and 20-30 seconds and at these settings, in or near the city or lights it sucks....So...IMHO...yes, the TOKINA BLOWS (but not the Canon away)...LOL

Really not sure why this lens is so popular. the 10-22 handles flare better, is very sharp and controls the distortion at the wide end very nicely...And although it's not an L...I've not heard of any build issues

You folks posting here in this thread have really pulled the best out of this lens....I was sure it was the lens for me after going through the whole thread.....But, in the end, I chose the 10-22

ride5000

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 05:11

seeing as this is a lens sample archive, perhaps it would be helpful if people posted examples of the flare they find excessive?

hollis_f

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 06:12

seeing as this is a lens sample archive, perhaps it would be helpful if people posted examples of the flare they find excessive?

Post #1917

ride5000

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 07:00

thanks frank. i remember when you posted those. here's a link to make it easier:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=11168627&postcount=1917

ok, that's a single example of ANY flare at all. (IMO that is not excessive flare, but to each their own.) i have shots with flare in them, but i do not find it excessive. that's why i asked for examples, so that people can judge for themselves whether the degree of flare is acceptable for them or not.

anybody else care to show a sample of what they consider to be excessive flare?

Nick Laos

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 07:12

flare

vipergts831

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 07:16

You really buy this lens for the speed since your giving up the range. That's what your going for and it's tack sharp image production. Now before anyone says why would one want 2.8 in ultra wide angle lens Nikon makes thier 14-24 2.8 and Canon has their 16-35 2.8. Their is a market for speed. On crop the tokina gives you that option.

Nick Laos

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 07:43

here is the same scene but shot without front lights seen on terrace on 1st picture

Nick Laos

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 07:47

and here is flare against the sun

newporthomie

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 08:19

here is the same scene but shot without front lights seen on terrace on 1st picture

Did you use any filter

hairy_moth

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 08:20

and here is flare against the sun
That shot looks really bad. Was there any other glass between the lens and the scene (e.g., filter, bus window) or is that all lens flare?

Nick Laos

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 08:24

Did you use any filter

no filter

Nick Laos

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 08:25

That shot looks really bad. Was there any other glass between the lens and the scene (e.g., filter, bus window) or is that all lens flare?

yes..b+w kasseman cp..do you think it caused such flare?

thatkatmat

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 09:15

Just trying to be honest about the lens, I wouldn't suggest folks use this for "in the city" night scenes....I spent a lot of time trying not to get flare in the shots below...You can see it in the viewfinder.

anybody else care to show a sample of what they consider to be excessive flare?

I usually don't keep my non keepers, but here's a few, no filters...

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_xXHTtcTdKU8/TULZxJBqk2I/AAAAAAAAA4M/K84fTx-I0wM/s1024/IMG_0219.jpg

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_xXHTtcTdKU8/TULZzsEkC3I/AAAAAAAAA4Q/nm3jErRYxMQ/s1024/IMG_0213.jpg

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_xXHTtcTdKU8/TULZ2QXXrqI/AAAAAAAAA4U/WSGWkBDo3_o/s1024/IMG_0206.jpg

CaptainTonus

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 09:50

I couldn't stand the 11-16 for night photography...The flare is so out of control it's ridiculous....Maybe having 2.8 is great for some, but at night, I use long shutter speeds so I'm usually up around f8 or so and 20-30 seconds and at these settings, in or near the city or lights it sucks....So...IMHO...yes, the TOKINA BLOWS (but not the Canon away)...LOL

Really not sure why this lens is so popular. the 10-22 handles flare better, is very sharp and controls the distortion at the wide end very nicely...And although it's not an L...I've not heard of any build issues

You folks posting here in this thread have really pulled the best out of this lens....I was sure it was the lens for me after going through the whole thread.....But, in the end, I chose the 10-22

I do a lot of astrophotography, stars and such, where you need to be shooting at max aperture all the time. For this purpose, the Tokina is the only lens that will do, because it's the only UWA that has a 2.8 max aperture for crop-sensor bodies.

As far as flare control is concerned, I've gotten used to working around it. It really hasn't been a big issue for me personally, but some of the examples people are posting look pretty bothersome. The 10-22 is an EF-S lens, and EF-S lenses have always left a lot to be desired for me, mostly because they feel cheap and plastic-like to handle. Conversely, the Tokina is built like a tank and feels like it could survive a nuclear attack. Don't get me wrong, the 10-22 is a killer lens, and it's probably the only other UWA I'd rather have, but I'm definitely keeping my Tokina until I step up to FF.

Some night samples I've taken using the Tokina, all taken wide-open at f/2.8:
http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4783small.jpg

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4773small.jpg

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4788small.jpg

vipergts831

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 09:57

It all depends how you handle it. I have some in this shot but to me it adds to the shot and doesnt take away from it:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4050/4451588507_8dbfd6047b_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/4451588507/)
Peaking (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/4451588507/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

Here is a 30 second exposure city shot. The articles you see above the bridge isnt flarring but rather water that splashed on to my camera while the exposure was occuring. The camera was sitting on a rock right on the bank of the river :)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2688/4449221185_9a728d092c_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/4449221185/)
BK Bridge 2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/4449221185/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

vipergts831

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 10:10

Here is a good review. I know there are many but here is the link:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tokina-11-16mm-f-2.8-AT-X-Pro-DX-Lens-Review.aspx

hairy_moth

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 10:18

yes..b+w kasseman cp..do you think it caused such flare?

I don't really know, in general I have not had issues with filters, but I haven't used one on this lens (yet) because of the vignetting issues (or so I have heard). But I just got this lens a few weeks ago.

This article (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml) suggests that filters contribute to flare, I wonder if UWA lenses are more susceptible that others.

The photo has so much flare and looks so hazy that I was expecting an answer that it was taken through a window.

WRXTACY

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 16:43

I do a lot of astrophotography, stars and such, where you need to be shooting at max aperture all the time. For this purpose, the Tokina is the only lens that will do, because it's the only UWA that has a 2.8 max aperture for crop-sensor bodies.

As far as flare control is concerned, I've gotten used to working around it. It really hasn't been a big issue for me personally, but some of the examples people are posting look pretty bothersome. The 10-22 is an EF-S lens, and EF-S lenses have always left a lot to be desired for me, mostly because they feel cheap and plastic-like to handle. Conversely, the Tokina is built like a tank and feels like it could survive a nuclear attack. Don't get me wrong, the 10-22 is a killer lens, and it's probably the only other UWA I'd rather have, but I'm definitely keeping my Tokina until I step up to FF.

Some night samples I've taken using the Tokina, all taken wide-open at f/2.8:
http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4783small.jpg

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4773small.jpg

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Salton%20Sea/IMG_4788small.jpg

Uh, those are amazing. Are they layered shots or one exposure?

CaptainTonus

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 18:22

Uh, those are amazing. Are they layered shots or one exposure?

Thanks! All single exposures, 30 seconds.

ckfishel2001

28th of January 2011 (Fri), 19:53

Thanks! All single exposures, 30 seconds.

Those shots are EXCELLENT Tonus!

Fountain Square Cincinnati

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5396514247_e3c2684523_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishelphoto/5396514247/)
Fountain Square Bathed in Red (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishelphoto/5396514247/) by ckfishel2001 (http://www.flickr.com/people/fishelphoto/), on Flickr

TweakMDS

29th of January 2011 (Sat), 06:27

Two older shots from a trip to prague in 2009 ;)
I recently changed my PP workflow a bit, so was finally able to get the more subtle hdr effect I wanted for this...
Both were handheld at risky shutterspeeds though, so no pixepeeping ^^

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5175/5396781428_fd6786571c_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdstoop/5396781428/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4108/5396781430_773fcb519f_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdstoop/5396781430/)

ride5000

29th of January 2011 (Sat), 07:11

I don't really know, in general I have not had issues with filters, but I haven't used one on this lens (yet) because of the vignetting issues (or so I have heard). But I just got this lens a few weeks ago.

This article (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-feb-05.shtml) suggests that filters contribute to flare, I wonder if UWA lenses are more susceptible that others.

The photo has so much flare and looks so hazy that I was expecting an answer that it was taken through a window.

filters absolutely cause flare. especially if they are not coated.

wide angle lenses in general are indeed more susceptible than longer lenses, basically because the likelihood of having a light source in the frame that is some distance away from the lens axis is so much higher.

newporthomie

30th of January 2011 (Sun), 04:15

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5009/5293036408_4fab025e56_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5293036408/)
IMG_3801 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5293036408/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

Thunderbutt

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 10:32

I just pulled the trigger on one.

The are back in stock at Adorama. $650 shipped. Or $680 with a UV filter.

I feel OK with the prices because they are going for almost as much used on ebay. With Adorama I get a warranty.

ETA: BACKORDERED!!!!! CRAP! I got an email several hours after I ordered that says it may take another two weeks to receive this.

I wish they wouldn't list things for sale that they don't have in stock. :( It's still listed on their website for sale. CRAP!

CaptainTonus

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 11:00

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Echo%20Mountain/IMG_1571small.jpg

Sharpstat

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 12:49

http://home.tiora.net/tony/Echo%20Mountain/IMG_1571small.jpg

Where was this taken? That shot reminds me of the Mount Lowe railway and Cheney trail in Pasadena. Had a sudden flashback.:mrgreen:

CaptainTonus

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 14:19

Where was this taken? That shot reminds me of the Mount Lowe railway and Cheney trail in Pasadena. Had a sudden flashback.:mrgreen:

That's exactly where it was taken! :cool:

vipergts831

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 15:37

Pasadena is the only other place i would live in besides where i grew up and currently live in, NYC :cool:

newporthomie

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 15:55

Pasadena is the only other place i would live in besides where i grew up and currently live in, NYC :cool:

my best aunt lives there :)

Sharpstat

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 21:26

That's exactly where it was taken! :cool:

I'm so glad you answered that,LOL. Many, many years ago while up there on my mountain bike I had my very first encounter with a rattlesnake near there.;) Of course I like the shot by the way!

wutakephoto

31st of January 2011 (Mon), 22:43

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5218/5405374544_02a6b860ee_z.jpg

rjx

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 04:25

My first long exposure seascape with an ND filter. I need to practice .... A LOT!!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5299/5412436137_3ff01a2e77_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5412436137/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5412436137/) by Randolph Knackstedt (http://www.flickr.com/people/randolphknackstedt/), on Flickr

ions

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 09:16

My first long exposure seascape with an ND filter. I need to practice .... A LOT!!

It's a great start! Pleasingly simple and clean.

1life1chance

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 11:03

My first long exposure seascape with an ND filter. I need to practice .... A LOT!!

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5299/5412436137_af457eaacf_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5412436137/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5412436137/) by Randolph Knackstedt (http://www.flickr.com/people/randolphknackstedt/), on Flickr
Serenity

thatkatmat

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 16:09

Right...each time I look at it if feels nicer and nicer.^^

crcal

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 19:37

rjx

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 20:41

I like this. Your horizon is a little tilted though.
I just fixed it (I think) and replaced the original on Flickr. Please let me know what you think. One of my contacts on Flickr pointed this out to me earlier and taught me how to do some things in Photoshop (marquee tool, Free Transform).

I aligned the horizon in Lightroom and adjusted the rocks with the marquee tool and free transform.

Originally I just aligned the rocks since that was the main subject and didn't know how to fix the horizon.

Looking forward to hear what you think.

Thanks.

BTW: The images in this thread were automatically updated with the new version.

rjx

3rd of February 2011 (Thu), 20:43

It's a great start! Pleasingly simple and clean.
Serenity
Right...each time I look at it if feels nicer and nicer.^^

Thank you for your comments :)

ions

6th of February 2011 (Sun), 13:10

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5256/5422401494_415eb6d9ea_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5422401494/)

apexman

6th of February 2011 (Sun), 20:45

^ Cool shot ions.

apexman

6th of February 2011 (Sun), 20:46

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5213/5419670131_94b22c29d7_z.jpg

ions

6th of February 2011 (Sun), 22:57

^ Cool shot ions.

Thank you.

rjx

7th of February 2011 (Mon), 04:56

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5172/5423955153_0a0fa55675_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5423955153/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/randolphknackstedt/5423955153/) by Randolph Knackstedt (http://www.flickr.com/people/randolphknackstedt/), on Flickr

hollis_f

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 05:55

For the first time in ages, this morning we had calm winds and a cloudless sky - and the forecast says it'll only last one day. So I was off to Brighton first thing to try some long exposures with the 116..

http://www.frankhollis.com/temp/Old%20Pier.jpg

rjx

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 11:47

I just got an email that BH has these in stock for $599.

LINK (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&Q=&sku=554035&is=REG&A=ShowProduct)

hairy_moth

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 13:51

Dang.. I paid 650 for Christmas.. Love the lens though.

BTW.. I just checked, many places have them for $599. Tokina must have finally figured out that they had to change their production allocation to make more Canon lenses and less for those other cameras!

It was unbelievable.. The Canon mounts were never in stock, but the lenses with the wrong mounts were always in stock. It was like the Tokina Sales Manager wasn't talking to the Manufacturing Manager.

lazer-jock

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 14:05

They may have a policy of not chasing short-term fluctuations until they can be sure that they are indeed long-term trends. The amount of money lost do to production changes because a sale spiked demand that wouldn't still be there a year from now could be costly too. Things like bing cashback changed buying habits while it was in effect, and to a much smaller extent, I think that the Canon Loyalty Program has wooed some enthusiasts. Some of these programs come and go, and a company like THK wouldn't want to be left holding the bag when the music stops.

ching

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 14:28

I just grab one from BH today $599 + no tax + free shipping. They are finally in-stock!
I check it every morning for like a month.

rjx

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 16:14

I just checked, many places have them for $599.
I predict they all won't last very long.

I remember last time they were simultaneously in stock at BH, Ado, etc; and they sold out about a week later if I remember correctly.

Rafromak

8th of February 2011 (Tue), 23:23

Well, I really like the Tokina 11-16mm, but I haven't taken a lot of photos with it this winter. Enjoy the Auroras in Alaska recently (tokina at 11mm, MF at infinite, and f/2.8):
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/Rayfromalaska/Space/Auroras_4684.jpg

ride5000

9th of February 2011 (Wed), 16:55

wow!

hieu1004

10th of February 2011 (Thu), 20:26

Well, I really like the Tokina 11-16mm, but I haven't taken a lot of photos with it this winter. Enjoy the Auroras in Alaska recently (tokina at 11mm, MF at infinite, and f/2.8):

Love it! I hope I see the northern lights one day, so beautiful.

Here is a very old HDR edit that I did for fun...

http://hieu.smugmug.com/Photography/HDR/IMG5960/1179217728_goUde-XL.jpg

Rafromak

11th of February 2011 (Fri), 01:15

Love it! I hope I see the northern lights one day, so beautiful.

Here is a very old HDR edit that I did for fun...

http://hieu.smugmug.com/Photography/HDR/IMG5960/1179217728_goUde-XL.jpg
Very nice. The HDR effect on an structure like that makes for a very interesting photo.

newporthomie

12th of February 2011 (Sat), 14:16

Sedalia Mo

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5012/5439524226_d5ba62f014_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524226/)
IMG_1119 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524226/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5053/5439524220_ef9d5f3936_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524220/)
IMG_1118 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524220/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5016/5439524218_82402cbb00_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524218/)
IMG_1116 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5439524218/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

hieu1004

12th of February 2011 (Sat), 14:19

Very nice. The HDR effect on an structure like that makes for a very interesting photo.

Thanks! :)

ions

12th of February 2011 (Sat), 17:04

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/5439430583_e9fac12c91_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5439430583/)

newporthomie

13th of February 2011 (Sun), 14:24

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/5440789979_37602453e4_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5440789979/)
IMG_4636 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5440789979/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

vipergts831

14th of February 2011 (Mon), 11:08

Nice view from Highline park!

newporthomie

14th of February 2011 (Mon), 11:22

Nice view from Highline park!

You are right
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4112/5440789971_df223b606f_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5440789971/)
IMG_4633 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5440789971/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

SnapsbyPoteat

15th of February 2011 (Tue), 23:39

SnapsbyPoteat

15th of February 2011 (Tue), 23:40

Just got my hands on this lens! I'm going to italy in April, do you recommend a CP with it? Or should I just save my money for more gelato? :)

MFG

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 00:08

i will be using this lens on my 5DII tonight for a gig.. cant wait to see how it is on a FF at 16mm...

1life1chance

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 00:52

Just got my hands on this lens! I'm going to italy in April, do you recommend a CP with it? Or should I just save my money for more gelato? :)

Go for a B+W CPL and B+W ND106 ND filter, too, as Italy has many water fountains and springs....let the Italian dudes buy you the gelatos....c'mon now, as if you don't understand the game???!!! :p

ride5000

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 04:59

i will be using this lens on my 5DII tonight for a gig.. cant wait to see how it is on a FF at 16mm...

up close, you'll be surprised at how thin the DOF is... focus actually matters!

ckfishel2001

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 06:07

up close, you'll be surprised at how thin the DOF is... focus actually matters!

I just got a 5D2 about a month ago and finally got a chance to strap this lens on. WIDE

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/5450160995_35dbd21f9a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishelphoto/5450160995/)
Have a Bite at The Big Top (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishelphoto/5450160995/) by ckfishel2001 (http://www.flickr.com/people/fishelphoto/), on Flickr

rjx

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 13:47

Can someone post some test shots of this on a 5D with a 1.4x TC?

muusers

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 15:58

Can someone post some test shots of this on a 5D with a 1.4x TC?

lol whut? why put an extender on a wideangle? That kinda misses the point doesnt it?

vipergts831

16th of February 2011 (Wed), 16:09

lol whut? why put an extender on a wideangle? That kinda misses the point doesnt it?

It allows for the use of the zoom range. There is a thread around here on it :D

ckfishel2001

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 07:14

It allows for the use of the zoom range. There is a thread around here on it :D

but it's no longer the zoom range you bought it for. You would get around 15 at the wide end with an extender @ f/4. 15 is just fine on a 5D without the extender and you get f/2.8. I suppose it would make it like a VERY mini 17-40 type lens, but it's such a narrow zoom. I haven't used it it a ton on full frame, but kinda thinking of it as a prime (that you can give a slight tweak to).

vipergts831

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 12:34

but it's no longer the zoom range you bought it for. You would get around 15 at the wide end with an extender @ f/4. 15 is just fine on a 5D without the extender and you get f/2.8. I suppose it would make it like a VERY mini 17-40 type lens, but it's such a narrow zoom. I haven't used it it a ton on full frame, but kinda thinking of it as a prime (that you can give a slight tweak to).

Yup ive always thought of it as a prime on FF. I mean 15 on FF is very WIDE :D Thats why i would never sell it even if i went FF :cool:

HAudidoody

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 13:28

matrix311

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 13:38

Go for a B+W CPL and B+W ND106 ND filter, too, as Italy has many water fountains and springs....let the Italian dudes buy you the gelatos....c'mon now, as if you don't understand the game???!!! :p
which filters specifically? Did you have the actual part numbers or links by chance?

1life1chance

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 15:24

which filters specifically? Did you have the actual part numbers or links by chance?
take your pick here (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_4_27?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=b%2Bw+77mm+circular+polarizer&sprefix=b%2Bw+77mm+circular+polarizer) and here (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_24?url=search-alias%3Delectronics&field-keywords=b%2Bw+77mm+neutral+density&sprefix=b%2Bw+77mm+neutral+density)

jwcdds

17th of February 2011 (Thu), 23:46

http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/Lens/Tokina-11-16/20110217-IMG1749/1190876467_XZDGM-XL.jpg

http://julianchen.smugmug.com/Misc/Lens/Tokina-11-16/20110217-IMG1756/1190876343_jxjWA-L.jpg

ckfishel2001

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 07:09

I'm having a lot of concerns with respect to the sharpness of this lens. The right-side seems significantly less sharp than the left-side. Center is OK, but corners run from good to simply terrible.

I'll post some pictures when I get the chance but compared to my 17-55, well, really, there is no comparison. I don't feel I have time to exchange given I'm leaving in a week and a half for the purpose I purchased this lens. Anyone else with a similar experience with respect to bad sharpness uniformity, even at f/8? I'm not pixel peeping here. It's pretty obvious.

Sorry to hear about that. The 17-55 is a great lens as well. I haven't seen what you're talking about. Tokina doesn't usually have the quality control issues that you might find with Sigma, but even with Canon (Nikon) lenses you get a dud. Sounds like you might unfortunately have gotten a dud?:(

jamiewednesday

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 07:48

Just discovered this forum. And this thread...

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af29/jamiewednesday/normantonchurch2.jpg

jamiewednesday

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 08:05

http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af29/jamiewednesday/IMG_1702_2_1-1.jpg

lazer-jock

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 08:16

Welcome to the Forum Jamie! (and nice shots too!)

ckfishel2001

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 11:50

Welcome to the Forum Jamie! (and nice shots too!)

indeed on both points

Rafromak

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 21:57

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/5439430583_e9fac12c91_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5439430583/)

Very cool photos!

ions

18th of February 2011 (Fri), 23:01

Thank you. :)

jamiewednesday

19th of February 2011 (Sat), 02:26

Welcome to the Forum Jamie! (and nice shots too!)

indeed on both points

Thanks very much. Only got the lens a few weeks back but I've managed a couple of trips out

pridash

19th of February 2011 (Sat), 12:51

At 16mm: -

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5451808286_6d11a74098_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pridash/5451808286/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pridash/5451808286/) by P Lawrence (http://www.flickr.com/people/pridash/), on Flickr

MFG

20th of February 2011 (Sun), 17:38

i switched to 5DII but retain this lens as my current only wide angle lens before i upgraded to 35L.

yes i know the wideness is diff... but for any of you who wants to know how well this lens was on a FULLFRAME camera 5DII. here are the pictures. BTW, the lens is only usage at 16mm - with some vignette on the edges..

here are some pictures. Lenses used in my Facebook were 11-16 2.8, 50 1.4 and 70-200 II. Hence all the wide angle shots were from this 11-16 @16mm.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=10150102000119776&set=a.10150100552204776.286744.250875609775&theater (http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=10150102000119776&set=a.10150100552204776.286744.250875609775&theater)

http://www.facebook.com/#!/album.php?aid=286744&id=250875609775

http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=10150101999959776&set=a.10150100552204776.286744.250875609775&theater

http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=10150100552939776&set=a.10150100552204776.286744.250875609775&theater

cheers,
Scott

Acamacho

20th of February 2011 (Sun), 22:46

Slowly getting back to my hobby after wrapping a project at work:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5463511585_168ed0d017_z.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5463536097_5fb668f3e8_z.jpg

Daughter's birthday, but definitely going out and shooting different things. Might be fun lens. :)

ions

21st of February 2011 (Mon), 20:12

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5466502755_893be4974e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5466502755/)

jaycky

21st of February 2011 (Mon), 21:31

gotta stay away from this thread for a little bit

Acamacho

23rd of February 2011 (Wed), 05:34

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5470964544_90b1c4ceaf.jpg

vipergts831

24th of February 2011 (Thu), 22:31

Here are a pair of shots:

1
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5475110455_cfd609a947_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5475110455/)
Time Warner Center.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5475110455/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

2
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5475709322_bc199813fc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5475709322/)
Trump Time.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5475709322/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

will-san

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 00:00

Silver Efx Pro 2 came out today so I wanted to shoot something that would be fun to convert to Black and White

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5475249835_a645037f80_z.jpg

TweakMDS

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 02:18

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5466502755_893be4974e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5466502755/)

Well done! Really stunning material, very crisp and vivid, it really pops off the screen. I'm curious about your processing on this though, care to show a before and after?

Gordo Amsterdam

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 03:20

My first shot at HDR:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5052/5474423011_3fb1333ebc_b.jpg
@ 11mm and f5.0

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5474421105_dc51c759d6_b.jpg
@ 11mm and f5.0

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5177/5475015988_c0980c187e_b.jpg
@ 11mm and f4.5
Not to fond of this one. And there's still some CA visible on the top right which I forgot to correct.

ions

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 11:36

Well done! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5466502755/)[my edit] Really stunning material, very crisp and vivid, it really pops off the screen. I'm curious about your processing on this though, care to show a before and after?

Thank you! Ask and you shall receive. I've been meaning to post a processing process deal for a while, but never got around to it. This was a good time to do so. I put it in the raw conversion before/after thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=11912388#post11912388)

1life1chance

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 13:07

Thank you! Ask and you shall receive. I've been meaning to post a processing process deal for a while, but never got around to it. This was a good time to do so. I put it in the raw conversion before/after thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=11912388#post11912388)
awesomezzzzzz :)

Crayons15

25th of February 2011 (Fri), 19:04

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v649/Crayons15/IMG_5803.jpg

pridash

26th of February 2011 (Sat), 06:58

Silver Efx Pro 2 came out today so I wanted to shoot something that would be fun to convert to Black and White

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5099/5475249835_a645037f80_z.jpg

Fantastic!! Love the conversion using SEP2.

Merkin

28th of February 2011 (Mon), 09:19

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5252/5483946097_634b6f1cec.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pshumaker/5483946097/)
Cold Blooded Killa (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pshumaker/5483946097/) by pshumaker (http://www.flickr.com/people/pshumaker/), on Flickr

AzzKicker

28th of February 2011 (Mon), 14:10

Really Excited. Just purchased this lens for my 1DIV and 7D. Can't wait to use it.

Nick Laos

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 08:07

...

tagakweens

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:17

stupid question (newbie here): can you shoot @ f/2.8 and keep everything in focus(clear)... how?

Nick Laos

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:22

after 3m (I think, maybe slightly less) distance, everything is in focus...if it's less than this, everything in shot should be on the same plane in space...

hollis_f

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:23

stupid question (newbie here): can you shoot @ f/2.8 and keep everything in focus(clear)... how?

Not everything, but almost everything. Focus on something 2.5m away and you'll have everything from about 1.5m to infinity in focus.

tagakweens

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:25

after 3m (I think, maybe slightly less) distance, everything is in focus...if it's less than this, everything in shot should be on the same plane in space...

so, if I'm taking a picture of let's say, the new york skyline, I can keep it @ f/2.8 and everything would be in focus...

thanks...

Nick Laos

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:27

yes, but in this case steppin down to f/8 would result in sharper picture

tagakweens

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 09:30

Thanks guys again for the tips...

newporthomie

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 15:19

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5097/5433913348_e072656640_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5433913348/)
IMG_4553 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5433913348/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

AzzKicker

2nd of March 2011 (Wed), 18:39

I'm having a lot of concerns with respect to the sharpness of this lens. The right-side seems significantly less sharp than the left-side. Center is OK, but corners run from good to simply terrible.

I'll post some pictures when I get the chance but compared to my 17-55, well, really, there is no comparison. I don't feel I have time to exchange given I'm leaving in a week and a half for the purpose I purchased this lens. Anyone else with a similar experience with respect to bad sharpness uniformity, even at f/8? I'm not pixel peeping here. It's pretty obvious.

Man, Bummer, I just recieved mine and also have that problem! The RIGHT side is OBVIOUSLY less sharp. Of course thats just with the 10 or so pics I've taken with it. I'm actually not noticing it all types of pics. The one I did see it on th emost was was taking a pic at a brick wall at an ofset angle.

Scapevision

4th of March 2011 (Fri), 10:14

Man, Bummer, I just recieved mine and also have that problem! The RIGHT side is OBVIOUSLY less sharp. Of course thats just with the 10 or so pics I've taken with it. I'm actually not noticing it all types of pics. The one I did see it on th emost was was taking a pic at a brick wall at an ofset angle.

Seriously, you can't judge the performance sharpness if you shoot at an angle. Focus line is angled, so those closer/farther may fall outside of the perfect focus area.

AzzKicker

4th of March 2011 (Fri), 11:02

Seriously, you can't judge the performance sharpness if you shoot at an angle. Focus line is angled, so those closer/farther may fall outside of the perfect focus area.

I know, but it wasn't that or else the forefront would be blurry as well. Besides, I just tested it on a straight on brick wall and it is quite obvious. There is something wrong with lens. Never again will I go third party. It's getting returned.

Here are samples, even when not at 100% you can see the softness on far right:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5058/5496846385_3c6a46f0af.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenzamora/5496846385/)
RDZ_1935 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenzamora/5496846385/) by Ruben Zamora (http://www.flickr.com/people/rubenzamora/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5294/5497440950_d154bf7c3c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenzamora/5497440950/)
RDZ_1927 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubenzamora/5497440950/) by Ruben Zamora (http://www.flickr.com/people/rubenzamora/), on Flickr

YOu view original

newporthomie

4th of March 2011 (Fri), 14:30

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5173/5497159408_719e2040fb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5497159408/)
IMG_4668 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5497159408/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

ions

4th of March 2011 (Fri), 15:33

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5497406691_5ae24bcb4d_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5497406691/)

newporthomie

4th of March 2011 (Fri), 15:35

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5098/5497020166_7527297b52_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5497020166/)
IMG_4642 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5497020166/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

sudipto_roy

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 09:18

I am considering buying this lens but I am a bit wary about reports on its tendency to flare. Was wondering if it is a bit of exaggeration. Could someone please post a few low light images taken with a few bright lights in the distance? The typical shots of urban landscape taken at around dusk. That will really help me make up my mind. Actually I want to buy this lens. Just need a few strong endorsements from you guys.

Nick Laos

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 11:09

...

Nick Laos

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 11:20

...

Nick Laos

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 11:23

....

sudipto_roy

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 11:43

Thanks a tonne Nick. Fantastic shots. These are precisely the type of shots I wanted to see. And I am convinced those flare worries are not so critical. Though I must say I do not like the way this lens creates the star effect on light source. Too many rays. But I guess I can live with that.

Scapevision

5th of March 2011 (Sat), 18:20

sudipto_roy

6th of March 2011 (Sun), 01:24

Thanks for that tip scape. What is the ideal aperture and focal length combination where this lens performs at its best, you think?

Sven-EOS

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 05:00

Dont' use this lens a lot.
But.. I did use it to shoot some instruments I was hoping to sell.
Both were sold very fast, so I guess I did a good job.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_kjJaNzHgeY0/TXYKu4-5gZI/AAAAAAAAPyI/8kiBwhgjn1s/s512/IMG_2376-4.jpg
1/90s, f/6.7, ISO:1600

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_kjJaNzHgeY0/TXYKvfkxUcI/AAAAAAAAPyM/WHTqE_XwgCs/s512/IMG_2378-Edit-12.jpg
1/3s, f/22.0, ISO:1600

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_kjJaNzHgeY0/TXYKvuzL7TI/AAAAAAAAPyQ/ApV7t1X6Oy8/s512/IMG_2394-7.jpg
1/60s, f/4.0, ISO:1600

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_kjJaNzHgeY0/TXYKv5UYzXI/AAAAAAAAPyU/gGq41-qzkng/s512/IMG_2395-8.jpg
1/60s, f/4.0, ISO:1600

newporthomie

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 06:31

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5135/5509147318_38a74031bb_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5509147318/)
IMG_4688 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5509147318/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

Mannytkd

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 07:34

These were taken in the Yorkshire Dales, this lens rocks...i've normaly stopped the lens down to F/16 for greater DOF but there's all the talk that wide lenses are best between F/11 and F/16 so i've gone in between and now set it to F/14.

http://www.karls-photography.co.uk/monochrome/274.jpg

http://www.karls-photography.co.uk/landscapes/254.jpg

hollis_f

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 09:10

there's all the talk that wide lenses are best between F/11 and F/16

I'm not sure why anybody might think this is so. The difference in depth of field between f/2.8 and f/16 at 11mm is minimal. Most lenses have a 'sweet spot' a stop or two narrower than wide-open and, on today's APS-C sensors, diffraction starts affecting image quality at around f/11. So I'd reckon the best range is f/4 to f/11.

I'd love a good explanation as to why f/16 might possibly be better.

vipergts831

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 20:46

The following two shots i took from a small hidden bar/lounge Mayra (MY GF) took me to. They are called speak easy's. The location is really intresting. Mayra took me into what looked like a hotdog shop. I said okay i like hot dogs so lets eat. But that wasnt were we were going. There was an old phonebooth inside this shop. Mayra went into and picked up the phone. I thought that was odd. Then 15 minutes later a secret door opened within the booth with a host saying our booth was ready. I said to myself what the hell? :lol: I walked through this small secret door and bamm it was this dark moody bar/lounge. People in the booths were covered by the shadows surrounding them. It was awesome. The location speaks to a time in NYC (1920-40's) in which many of these kind of locations existed. There is no sign for this place. You have to hear about it by word of mouth or thier website. Totally cool experience with the secret entrance to it.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5139/5502815895_e00915dfba_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5502815895/)
_MG_1089.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5502815895/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5213/5502816639_93fd6a9da0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5502816639/)
_MG_1093.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/prodigy83/5502816639/) by Prodigy83 (http://www.flickr.com/people/prodigy83/), on Flickr

kermit4u

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 20:52

[QUOTE=vipergts831;11984283]The following two shots i took from a small hidden bar/lounge Mayra (MY GF) took me to. They are called speak easy's. The location is really intresting. Mayra took me into what looked like a hotdog shop. I said okay i like hot dogs so lets eat. But that wasnt were we were going. There was an old phonebooth inside this shop. Mayra went into and picked up the phone. I thought that was odd. Then 15 minutes later a secret door opened within the booth with a host saying our booth was ready. I said to myself what the hell? :lol: I walked through this small secret door and bamm it was this dark moody bar/lounge. People in the booths were covered by the shadows surrounding them. It was awesome. The location speaks to a time in NYC (1920-40's) in which many of these kind of locations existed. There is no sign for this place. You have to hear about it by word of mouth or thier website. Totally cool experience with the secret entrance to it.

Is this in NY City?

vipergts831

8th of March 2011 (Tue), 20:54

newporthomie

9th of March 2011 (Wed), 04:09

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5017/5511847390_2925e91ff8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5511847390/)
IMG_4757 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/47829441@N04/5511847390/) by newporthomie (http://www.flickr.com/people/47829441@N04/), on Flickr

sudipto_roy

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 01:03

Lovely perspective there newport_beach. Is this a large crop?

newporthomie

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 01:07

Thanks. Yes it is

thatkatmat

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 14:25

Just got an email from B&H, they finally have them in stock:
-----------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your interest in this item:
Tokina - TO111628PDXC
11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX Autofocus Lens for Canon APS-C DSLRs

Please be aware that this item is currently in stock at bhphotovideo.com. To view the item, click here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/sitem/sku=554035&is=REG&bi=E15

ions

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 19:50

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5260/5516462684_0d4c295400_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopherbrian/5516462684/)

B.I. Photography

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 21:47

sudipto_roy

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 22:25

Very nice photograph. Peaceful.

Sdiver2489

10th of March 2011 (Thu), 22:58

Still a little on the fence...my problem with this lens for the short time I had it was the mediocre(imo) MFD, no usm and 11mm on the wide end. For Nikon users they get a nice 16.5mm lens...for us we get a 17.5mm equivalent.

The Canon may not be quite as sharp but it has the 10mm and flare resistance draw...oh the decisions...I keep looking at pictures from each thread and obviously both can be used effectively. I'm not sure you can go that wrong in this market segment.