Tokina 11mm - 16mm F2.8 thoughts?

well, what is everyone's thoughts on the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX II Digital Zoom Lens? I'm using a Canon 60D body and the stock 18mm- 55mm lens at the moment. That lens is a pain to get into focus at night time! I do alot of lightning photography out here in Arizona, and I like the Tokina cause of the easy focus window, wide angle and F2.8. I have about $600 to spend on a lens. Just wanted to get some opinions here first on this lens before I purchase it. Thanks for any feedback.

Like yourself, I have also looked at the Tokina 11-16, Canon 10-22, and the Sigma 10-20. In my mind, from the reviews, the Tokina is worth it, and better in the lighting than the Canon and the Sigma by at least 1 F-stop.

I have the toki... It's pretty good, a lot of fun though really soft in the corners wide open. I think it's worth the money if you need a uwa. Wide open, a lot of visible aberrations though. It's not perfectly sharp etc, but it's a really good cheap lens, and at f2.8 really worth it.

Heya,

I have the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 II. Excellent lens. Built like L-quality type stuff, very big, very heavy, very tank-like. It's a very sharp lens. Glass is fast. Autofocus is not fast, but you really don't even need autofocus on this thing. The infinity setting on the lens... is actually infinity (at least on my copy). I literally just turn mine to infinity and point it at the sky and it's all in focus just fine. Same with landscape. Don't confuse distortion due to wide angle with softness in corners.

That said, based on what you're doing, I would also look at:

Samyang/Rokinon 16mm F2
Samyang/Rokinon 14mm F2.8

You don't need autofocus at night, since you're doing night lighting and all. Manual does it great. So you can save a lot going to some sharper, faster glass, in the 16mm F2.

Very best,

From my research I read that the Tokina can result in a lot of flare when its wide open, I also understand that most of the times you wont be shooting wide open, I personally went with the Canon 10-22, and as much as I loved the lens I would have liked a lower aperture during some shots.

The Tokina 11-16 is an excellent lens, as mentioned by MalVeauX.

Mine is very sharp edge to edge, even wide open, and gets used the most for taking photos of the Auroras, or taking photos indoors. I use it with a 7D. Like Tokina lenses enough to have also purchased a 16-28 f/2.8 for my 5DII, and this one is also very sharp wide open.

Don't get discouraged by lens flare, since all UW lenses are prone to it, including the Nikon offering, which by the way is perhaps the best landscape zoom.

I have the Tokina 11-16 Pro DX II on a 7D and I think it's a great lens. There is always a lot of cr@p talked about UWA lenses to do with flaring and aberration. I have taken a hundreds of pictures with mine and had about 1 photo that I had to bin due to a flare. Aberration is fixable in Lightroom. Shoot with the sun in the right place and your fine.

I spent a long time considering the Toki and the Canon 10-17, most people said buy the Canon. I'm glad I didn't. My brother bought the Canon to be different, I borrowed it and either I'm very fussy, he has a bad copy or the image quality is really poor.

If in doubt, rent first and see what suits you.

Heya,

Lens flare is a reality on many lenses. The Tokina is definitely prone to flare compared to some other ultrawide lenses. But that shouldn't be a massive problem unless you make a living from the lens, at least, in my opinion. With the lens hood on, and simply pay attention to light sources, the flaring should be a zero issue, and sometimes, you may even want flare (some people think flare is 100% bad news, but wow, so many shots and video clips include flare because they wanted it there... must not be a universal law).

Anyhow, here's some examples of flare versus no flare with the Tokina 11-16 F2.8 II (flare was intentional just to see it's effects):

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mwise1023/12093​995785/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mwise1023/12094​635666/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mwise1023/12094​267943/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mwise1023/13007​290245/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mwise1023/10139​055633/

Sold my Canon 10-22 for the Tokina 11-16, no regrets. However, I do not travel much to Utah anymore. (I.E. places that cry out for UWA.) Sold my Tokina 11-16. Great lens though.

Heya,

I look at it like this: If you need wide aperture on a crop, there's only a few lenses that are ultrawide and affordable with that, before you get into really expensive territories. The Tokina happens to be in that group. If you want to go cheaper, then the manual lenses are where you go. If you want autofocus, the Tokina has that and is pretty good. If you are doing night skies, you want that fast aperture. If you're not doing night skies and you're stopping down to F8 or more, then you don't need the Tokina, and you are probably going to do very well, with the slightly advantaged Canon 10-22 instead in that regard.

Very best,

@MalVeauX

Yeah, sometimes flare can be artistic, but i haven't seen very many shots where this is the case with the Tokina. Your second shot there, would be OK, if it weren't for that huge green blob at the bottom of the shot.
I can't imagine many people would find that green spot acceptable.

You can get rid of it, by cropping off the bottom of the shot, but then you change your comp.

Yes, most lenses will flare.... if aimed at the sun, but i don't want to have to go out of my way to avoid flare (or the sun/moon/ reflections, etc.). This limits your compositional freedom.

I very rarely have to even consider flare, with my EF-s 10-22... and that's the way it should be. Every lens requires compromises, though.

But... to each their own.

I own both the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16.

I originally bought the Canon and really, really liked it. But I kept reading good things about the Tokina and the f2.8 would come in handy for wide-field astro photos, so I bought one, planning on selling the Canon if the Tokina was any good.

My first outing with it was to out local waterfowl reserve, taking low-angle extreme close-up, wide angle shots of the ducks and geese. When I got back I was so downhearted - the vast majority of the images were ruined by horrid lens-flare.

Further testing showed that the Tokina was all but useless on sunny days unless one were willing to restrict oneself to shooting with the sun on your back.

Unfortunately, it's great at astro shots (and it works with my my light-pollution filter, while the Canon doesn't). So I have to keep both.

Here's the Canon -

RayinAlaska wrote in post #16772777
Don't get discouraged by lens flare, since all UW lenses are prone to it

Except for the Canon 10-22. Just check out the lens sample fora. The Tokina forum is full of examples of lens flare. The only one I've seen in the 10-22 forum was with a cheap UV filter.

I own the tokina 11-16. It is far more prone to flare then the canon 10-22 or sigma 10-20. But its strength is its constant f2.8 which is great for things like low light/ night shooting

You said you do a lot or lightning shooting so the tokina might be a very good choice for you. Also you can wait to see how the soon to be released samyung 10mm f2.8 is.

hollis_f wrote in post #16773201
I own both the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16.

I originally bought the Canon and really, really liked it. But I kept reading good things about the Tokina and the f2.8 would come in handy for wide-field astro photos, so I bought one, planning on selling the Canon if the Tokina was any good.

My first outing with it was to out local waterfowl reserve, taking low-angle extreme close-up, wide angle shots of the ducks and geese. When I got back I was so downhearted - the vast majority of the images were ruined by horrid lens-flare.

Further testing showed that the Tokina was all but useless on sunny days unless one were willing to restrict oneself to shooting with the sun on your back.

Unfortunately, it's great at astro shots (and it works with my my light-pollution filter, while the Canon doesn't). So I have to keep both.

Here's the Canon -

And the Tokina -

Wow the Canon is so much sharper! And a big difference between 10 & 11mm. CA on the Tokina is pretty bad.

Do you need the zoom and 10-13mm? You could try the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm ƒ2.8?