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

It's the same category as their 12-24DX -- designed for APS-C but will physically fit any body (with vignetting at certain wider FL's). It is just like the Tamron Di-II and Sigma DC lenses.

Ah the anticipation.
First off this is their pro grade lens in cropped sensor format. Toke denotes pro grade lens by "ATX Pro." The letter "D" denotes that it's made for dslr sensors, while a "DX" denotes a cropped dslr sensor.
See here: http://www.tokina.co.j​p/news/tokina2006.jpg

Second, having owned both of the new Tokina 12-24 ATX Pro DX and the 100macro f2.8 ATX Pro D, I can say that they are really really built well. It doesn't feel elegant, but it just feels very robust. They have a really nice hood that is felt lined on the inside and a great center pinch lens cap (Canon should copy this cap). Tokes make my tammy's feel cheaper by about $200 from the build quality/feel aspect.

Both of the new Tokina's have undercut the market from a price point, so I would expect it to undercut the Tamron 17-50 by a small, about $40 margin. I don't think it would be cheaper than the Sigma 18-50, which just had it's own price lowered to just under $400.
In terms of optics, I find the toke's to be L level of sharpness and also with similar color tone, perhaps a bit cooler, but not by much if any.

Lastly, both tokes have CA when wide open. This improves by about a stop, so I'd guess about f4. According to a guy I know who shoots with a Pentax, it's b/c toke and pentax share lens design but Pentax has a better coating that they don't share with toke. Who knows. Unless the CA or the distortion is really bad, I'd probably go with the toke for it's build quality/feel and it's overall good optics and color tone.

Should be very interesting to see.
BTW, all these 16-50 ranage zooms for the cropped sensor is mimicing a traditional walking around lens range of 24/28-90 or so. So if you wanted one lens for walking around, these should be good.

As for me? With a cropped sensor, I'd still prefer an ultrawide like a 10-22, and a normal zoom like a 24-70, as this two lens combo is more versatile, but it would also cost more as well.

I expect there to be a lot of hype building up to the release of this lens and then when it doesn't blow everything else out of the water will see hundreds of "Tokina 16-50 v Tamron 17-50" threads so much so that everyone will be sick of them! LOL.

I'm sorta in line with Tee-Why's thinking. . . ultimately, I'm shooting to have the canon 10-22, 24-70L and the 70-200 IS in my bag. . . no need for a 16,17-50. But, I reserve the right to have weak spells and be tempted by a 3rd party 16,17-50 alternatives to hold me over until my bag is complete. . . .

I suppose thats pessimistic but, I can't help it. I also expect some Tamron rebates to hit the market when this lens does negating the small difference in price.

I hope I'm wrong though. . . naturally looking forward to your analysis Jojo

Nice lens by the looks of it. I'd certainly buy it if I stayed with a crop camera. If I keep my 5D though, I'll stick with my 17-40L.

Tokina really did their homework on this. They are bringing out 2 new lenses that are very clearly designed to work in concert together, 16-50 and 50-135 both with f/2.8 aperature. I think people will be buying both as a pair since they fit so nicely together. I think those two lenses will make great wedding lenses.

I've had my eye on the 16-50 and 50-135 ever since they announced it. Given the notoriety that the Tamron 17-50 has been receiving (check out the MTF charts/review on photozone).. I think it'll be hard to knock them off unless it sneaks in at a lower price point.

Don't forget about the fisheye-zoom coming from Tokina as well

Very interested in this lens. I been waiting for it to come out so that I can compare it with the Tamron 1750. Either lens and my 70-200L will make the perfect combo. I heard its expected around October, correct?

Hmmm, probably would make me sell my Tokina 12-24.

this really makes the tokina 12-24mm rather useless eh, especially if you don't use it a lot from 12-15mm. plus its a stop faster as well.

I've had a 12mm and now a 15mm and I never notice I am missing the extra 3mm from my ex 12-24mm. What I do notice is sometimes my 15-30mm EX is too short. My only solution from an IQ, handling and price POV is to run the 15-30mm and the 24-105mm IS L together and I am now very well covered. But this new lens starts at 16mm which is fine still and ends at 50mm which is obviously more useful than the 17-40mm L (only reason I have never bought that L tho' it is one of the best!) So, the Toki is looking very promising - wide and good range for walkaround and fast aperture for indoors and decent bokah. It really will be the Cat amongst the Pigeons (or Ducks for the L fetishists). The battle will cover several lenses and I fancy the smart buy will be the Tokina. I also agree about the 12-24mm. A great lens, but I dunno if 3mm extra will cut it at f4 anymore when a comparison is done!

Yes, and this is why I haven't bought a 17-40 or 17-70 yet. If the Tokina ends up being really good, it would pretty much eliminate the 17-40 from my consideration. 16-50 vs. 17-70 might still be a tough call with the 16-50 having a clear speed advantage and the 17-70 having a length advantage.

I wasn't impressed based on Photozone's test. Yes its resolution numbers are very good, but it seems to stop there. Klaus found:

"The build quality is very decent build quality but typical for most Tamron lenses there's a little too much plastic in there for my taste."

"The AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR exhibited average distortion figures for a lens in this class. As expected there're pronounced barrel distortions (2.5%) at 17mm which even out around the 24mm setting."

"At f/2.8 the lens shows pronounced vignetting of 1EV at 17mm, 0.9EV at 50mm and a little less in between."

"On the downside the extreme corners showed a very strong degree of field curvature at 17mm and a little less so at 24mm."

"Chromatic aberrations (color shadows at harsh contrast transitions) are relatively well controlled except at 17mm at large aperture settings where the issue is very pronounced with a peak of 2px on the average at the image borders."

At least according to PZ's test, nothing really impresses me save for resolution figures.

Very true... and indeed. I don't want to process every pictures that I took, it's just pain in the ass. I always try to use as less PS as possible in all time.

Yeah, sort of. I guess if I start doing more wide angle landscapes it would be more useful, but I have yet to do that. I'm more from a photo journalism background and wide angle is important. I don't know. The speed is the most important thing, for me. Or, I'm just not good with wide angles. That must be my problem!

I found this over at dpreview. The prices seem pretty high.
http://forums.dpreview​.com …orum=1029&threa​d=19213852

Tokina 10-17 - Retail - 82000 yen (705USD)
Available sept.
Tokina 16-50 - Retail - 113000 yen (970USD)
Available late nov.
Tokina 50-135 - Retail - 138000 yen (1186USD)
Available oct.

These prices seem really HIGH, I hope this inaccurate.