Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Apr 2016 (Monday) 18:51
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tokina 16-28 2.8 thoughts?

 
snegron
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 55
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Florida
     
Apr 04, 2016 18:51 |  #1

I have never owned a Tokina lens, so I have no clue about their performance. Recently I have been debating whether to get:

- Canon 17-40 4L
- Canon 16-35 4L

The 17-40 4L fits my budget. The 16-35 4L is over my budget at this time. While I like the specs of the 16-35 4L, I can't bring myself to spending $1000 on one yet.

So, I came across the Tokina 16-28 2.8 priced in the same range as the 17-40 4L. From what I have read so far, you can't place any filters on the Tokina because of the large, pronounced curvature of the front element. Looks like a solid lens in terms of construction though. The 2.8 aperture is tempting.

I have read a few reviews that mention some issues with AF compatibility on Canon. Again, I have owned/used a Tokina. I have had Sigma and Tamron; negative experiences with boyh brands though.

Anyone here owned/used a Tokina 16-28 2.8? If so, what are your thoughts? How does it compare to the 17-40 4L?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
11,835 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 3606
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Rathdrum, Idaho
     
Apr 04, 2016 19:05 |  #2

Lens is sharp and does a great job. Biggest problem is You can use screw on filters. So its pretty much useless to lots of us.

I need to be able to slap on ND's and circulars when Im outside


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snegron
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 55
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Florida
     
Apr 04, 2016 20:15 as a reply to  @ umphotography's post |  #3

I wonder how well it will focus on my 7dmk2?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tyguy
Senior Member
Avatar
510 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 290
Joined Sep 2014
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Apr 05, 2016 00:12 |  #4

No filters and flares like crazy. Otherwise it's an excellent lens. AF is slower than a USM, but it's a wide angle so not much focusing to do.


-Tyler
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonYouCan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,488 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
Post edited over 4 years ago by CanonYouCan. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 05, 2016 17:49 |  #5

Had both lenses, Tokina is the best.

Positive points:
-Corner-corner razorsharp like the world changing Nikon 14-24.
-F2.8 (if you want to experiment with starheavens later)
-Built like a tank
-Built in lenshood, you never forget it.

Negatives:
-Heavy
-No filters (I personally didn't need them)
-Due to the bulb form some flare (but if you get to know the lens, you look in advance to avoid flare).

The Canon 17-40 is just a casual uwa, didn't like it cause there was too much distortion and unsharp corners.

So the IQ of the Tokina is top, I only sold it because it was too heavy with my light 6D :)
After this I bought the out of production Tokina 17 f3.5 (only available second hand on Ebay), this one was also sharp & super light & compact.

If I needed a lens today with limited budget I would re-order the Tokina 17 f3.5 from Ebay again.
It's the perfect mix between the Canon & Tokina that you doubt.
Still today a lot of lenses are unknown when oop, but this doesn't mean they are not good anymore, on controrary ;)

I have the best but expensive uwa now (Canon 16-35 f4L IS) but maybe I'll sell it this summer for this upcoming manual beast :
https://www.flickr.com …02/sets/7215766​4720514026 (external link)

For the first time 12mm on ff + f2.8 and no distortion, developped by Venus Optics, a team of photographers, very promising :)


Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Canon 16-35 F4 L | Sigma 85 1.4 Art | 70-200 2.8L II
Lighting : Godox AD600B TTL + Godox V860II-S + X1T-S
Modifiers: 60cm Collapsible Silver Beautydish + grid | Godox 120cm Octagon softbox + grid + Speedlite Flash bender
Tripod: Vanguard Alta 253CT carbon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
madhatter04
Goldmember
1,930 posts
Likes: 51
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Southern California
     
Apr 05, 2016 20:09 |  #6

Loved the stellar IQ from this lens but sadly, the flare was ghastly. I say that as a photographer who does a lot of night shooting. Even small bulbs from a lighted patio would cause rainbow halos a-plenty. :(


Designer // Art Director // Photographer
www.alexanderfitch.com (external link) | AlexFitchPhoto on Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
Avatar
993 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 441
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Az
     
Apr 05, 2016 23:59 as a reply to  @ madhatter04's post |  #7

This would be a deal breaker for me since I'm looking for a uwa for party dance shots during the reception at weddings. Having off camera lights set up, I'd be afraid of flaring every time I go for a shot.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonYouCan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,488 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
     
Apr 06, 2016 05:48 |  #8

For this I would advise for you both to try the Tokina 17 f3.5 ATX Pro (compact,sharp,non bulb,no flare,filters possible) secondhand on Ebay like I bought, it's a real gem and cheap!

Also the Sigma 15 2.8 Fisheye was great (I used it for partyshots in dark clubs for dance shots and also compact/sharp... everything you need), if you like the small distortion (it's only 15mm so the fisheye distortion is not so exagerated).

ma11rats wrote in post #17962361 (external link)
This would be a deal breaker for me since I'm looking for a uwa for party dance shots during the reception at weddings. Having off camera lights set up, I'd be afraid of flaring every time I go for a shot.


Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Canon 16-35 F4 L | Sigma 85 1.4 Art | 70-200 2.8L II
Lighting : Godox AD600B TTL + Godox V860II-S + X1T-S
Modifiers: 60cm Collapsible Silver Beautydish + grid | Godox 120cm Octagon softbox + grid + Speedlite Flash bender
Tripod: Vanguard Alta 253CT carbon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
Avatar
993 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 441
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Az
     
Apr 06, 2016 11:52 as a reply to  @ CanonYouCan's post |  #9

I'm not a fan of fisheye. Also, a key for me is whether or not the lens will focus in dark environments. When all I have to focus in is the Djs party lights, I need a lens that doesn't hunt. I use a 6d and the center dot works pretty damn well but still requires the focus assist light from my flash most of the time.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
"approx 8mm"
Avatar
9,288 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 386
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Apr 06, 2016 13:32 |  #10

snegron wrote in post #17960972 (external link)
I wonder how well it will focus on my 7dmk2?

Why would you want to use a Full Frame lens on a crop camera?

Why not buy a Canon 17-55mm 2.8 or Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 instead?


Mike Sowsun / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 100-400 II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snegron
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 55
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Post edited over 4 years ago by snegron.
     
Apr 06, 2016 16:59 |  #11

msowsun wrote in post #17962869 (external link)
Why would you want to use a Full Frame lens on a crop camera?

Why not buy a Canon 17-55mm 2.8 or Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 instead?


Several years ago when I was shooting Nikon, I was faced wirh a similar decision. Either get a 17-55mm 2.8 DX or the 17-35mm 2.8 non DX lens. I opted for the DX lens. While it was a great lens ( I still own it), I wanted the best possible optics for DX at the time. It was to be my main lens. Every other Nikon lens I owned was for "full frame".

Fast forward to last year and I found myself wanting to upgrade to a newer system from my two D200's and older D1X's. If I had gone with a full frame Nikon (D800), I would only have had all the full frame primes I currently own. However, I would have still needed to get a wide to normal zoom. I didn't like the D600 because it felt cheaply made and had a bad reputation of getting oil on the sensor. In other words I would have had to purchase a full frame body plus a decent (expensive) wide to normal lens.

So, having lost all hope that Nikon would ever release a D400, I decided to buy into Canon with a 7dmk2. Having also owned a T3i with a couple of kit lenses (my travel camera because my Nikon gear was way too heavy), I still have the 10-18 EFS, 18-55 EFS, 55-250 EFS.

For my 7dmk2, I have a 50mm 1.8 STM and a 70-200mm 2.8L (non IS). These two lenses work amazingly well on my 7dmk2.

Yes, I could go out and purchase the EFS 17-55mm 2.8, but based on my past experience I would rather have a full frame lens. At some point I will venture into full frame. Maybe in a few months, maybe in a few years. I would much rather own lenses that are compatible with both formats (regardless of the crop factor), than find myself in the same bad position I was with Nikon.

As far as selling equipment goes, I rarely sell any of my stuff. On a couple of occasions I was able to prevent getting scammed by online bogus buyers. So, I only prefer to sell in person, but unfortunately I live in a city where people don't spend much on photography equipment.

Also, I had a couple of negative experiences with Sigmas in the past.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tyguy
Senior Member
Avatar
510 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 290
Joined Sep 2014
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Apr 06, 2016 20:37 |  #12

I understand you're looking for a FF lens in case you get a FF body. The 16-28 is an awesome lens, but it's also a beast. I had a 16-28 and a Tokina 11-16. Also had a crop body & a full frame body. I ended up selling the 16-28 and keeping the 11-16.

The 16-28 is an awkward range on crop. Its bulk also made it less fun to use, and no ND filter was not good (no polarizing filters either, but they are weird on ultra wide angle lenses anyways). The 11-16 works on both my bodies (albeit only 15-16mm on the full frame). It is much more compact than the 16-28 (3.6" long vs 5.3") and can take 77mm filters. I love it on my 40D and 5D equally.

I would suggest you consider the new Tokina 11-20 2.8. From what I understand, it is as good as the 11-16. On a full frame it becomes a 15-20mm.

That said, if you're fine with a large lens and the field of view on a crop sensor, I highly recommend the 16-28.


-Tyler
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snegron
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 55
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Florida
     
Apr 06, 2016 21:07 |  #13

Tyguy wrote in post #17963227 (external link)
I understand you're looking for a FF lens in case you get a FF body. The 16-28 is an awesome lens, but it's also a beast. I had a 16-28 and a Tokina 11-16. Also had a crop body & a full frame body. I ended up selling the 16-28 and keeping the 11-16.

The 16-28 is an awkward range on crop. Its bulk also made it less fun to use, and no ND filter was not good (no polarizing filters either, but they are weird on ultra wide angle lenses anyways). The 11-16 works on both my bodies (albeit only 15-16mm on the full frame). It is much more compact than the 16-28 (3.6" long vs 5.3") and can take 77mm filters. I love it on my 40D and 5D equally.

I would suggest you consider the new Tokina 11-20 2.8. From what I understand, it is as good as the 11-16. On a full frame it becomes a 15-20mm.

That said, if you're fine with a large lens and the field of view on a crop sensor, I highly recommend the 16-28.

Thanks! I just got back from my local big box retailer and ended up purchasing the Canon 16-35 f4L. What sold me on the 16-35 was the IS. Hopefully it will work well on my 7dmk2.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tyguy
Senior Member
Avatar
510 posts
Gallery: 37 photos
Likes: 290
Joined Sep 2014
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Apr 06, 2016 23:46 |  #14

Nice, that's a great lens. Enjoy!


-Tyler
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Apr 07, 2016 00:55 |  #15

The 16-35/4 is a great lens for full frame and one day I will upgrade to full frame and sell my 17-50/2.8 OS. Until then, I just can't give up the 2.8 and 15mm on the long end.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,211 views & 3 likes for this thread
Tokina 16-28 2.8 thoughts?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Rosg85
853 guests, 300 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.