So, Who's Interested in the Tokina 16-50 f2.8 DX Pro?

any idea on price

It hasn't been announced, but my guess is it will be around the Sigma and Tamron price-point: $400-$450.

EDIT: Probably more like $550-$600.

That's one nice lens.

Does Tokina has something equivalent to Canon's USM or Sigma's HSM?

No, they don't, and neither does Tamron. Sigma is the only 3rd party that does (HSM). But Tokie's new "one-touch" mechanism is excellent for a non-FTM lens. Very intuitive and usability in the field is easy.

guess I will have to wait.
I was thinking about the new Tamron 17-50 but I wanna see what this is like

I've been going back and forth about picking up a 17-40L or 17-70. However, I've been telling myself that I should probably wait for this Tokina before buying a lens in this range. I'm still not convinced that I need f/2.8 on a walkaround lens, but I will be interested to see what the Tokina is like.

The up-side of this lens is huge -- just consider all its perks at its price-point. But the one thing that I am very curious about in terms of concern, however, is its CA performance, which in my findings (and elsewhere) plagues the otherwise excellent 12-24DX [See, for example http://www.pbase.com …s/image/6149023​6/original]

But overall I'm really excited about this new Tokie; I think it will be a ringer.

Jojo, you know I am interested. I am also very curious about the new 50-135 f/2.8. These 2 lenses will make a sweet combo. I had been getting some inconsistency from my Tamron but I think I found its pros and cons now and can acclimate. I have a feeling you will be doing a review!?!

Definitely of the Tokie 1650. I may pit it against only 1 other lens though, and that's TBD. There are way too many 16mm/17mm/18mm-xx lenses out there to do anything exhaustive.

I'm certainly interested...it's going to be that or Tamron 17-50, but I'm waiting for the reviews of the Tokina first .

This 16-50 f2.8 Tokina will be a Canon 17-40 killer

Is the Tokina going to be FF compatible?

Surely that has to be for a crop camera only? I can't see Tokina making a full-frame constant aperture f/2.8 for a full frame without the sort of compromises the 19-35 family have? i'd love to be wrong on this, but all the best stuff being produced now is for the APS-C camera format.

As long as there is a market for high build quality and an appreciation of the red ring, the 17-40 is safe. Justified or not. It's excellent value and unlikely to be seriously threatened by any number of fast 3rd party wide to medium tele zooms.

I think the 16-35 L has a bit more to prove tho! The f/2.8 on that lens is a very expensive stop of light, and anyone using a crop camera is losing out on a lot of its range as it is.