will the tokina 11-16 damage a FF camera?

MalVeauX wrote in post #16839993
Heya,

The 17-40 is fairly sharp. It's weak points are that it's F4 maximum, and that corner sharpness is not what some would call `L quality.' There's a reason it's only $600ish used. It's just not an outstanding `L like some of the others. If using it for landscape, stopping down to F8 all the time, it's a fine lens for that. But if you want to use it for more than that, the F4 can be a big limitation (I would buy one, but I will not bother with an F4 zoom, when I can get F2.8 in similar focal lengths, but then again, I do a lot of astrophotography wide field, and general low light work).

No, the 17-40mm is actually a great performer. It's a sharper lens at the corners than the 16-35mm II L.
The Tokina 16-28mm may beat both, however you can't put a filter on it.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/jpeg'

Here is 16mm on my 5D3. To get rid of the really soft edges (and very bad distortion) and the slight vignetting, I usually crop the 16mm shots down to the red box. I don't know what focal length would give that same FOV, so to be honest I wouldn't be shooting at 16mm with the Tokina.

In any case, here is the sample, showing you where I crop, and a bit of detail you might see, however this was also at f5.6, I could have gone to f8 or f11. Just to put a pic to the topic.

I loved my Tokina 11-16. Great lens! This lens kept me on my t2i/t4i for months longer than I would have without it!

If I stayed with a crop sensor camera id keep my 11-16, but a tokina 16-28 seems to be the best equivalent for a full frame

jonathanheierle wrote in post #16843553
If I stayed with a crop sensor camera id keep my 11-16, but a tokina 16-28 seems to be the best equivalent for a full frame

I agree, I have both a FF and APS-C right now, so I keep the 11-16 around for now.