Well 16-50 all at 2.8 constant is pretty high end, so being around 970 retail wouldn't suprise me if it does perform in flare resistence, distortion, color, sharpness.
grego Cream of the Crop  8,819 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: UCLA More info | Jul 15, 2006 16:53 | #31 Well 16-50 all at 2.8 constant is pretty high end, so being around 970 retail wouldn't suprise me if it does perform in flare resistence, distortion, color, sharpness. Go UCLA
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 15, 2006 18:41 | #32 I just saw that link at DPR...that's a crazy price. $970 USD for a non-IS, 3rd party, 16-50 APS-C? Even a suggested retail price of $970 is incredible. We'll have to see what it actually sells for, but at even $750 USD, it won't sell 1 copy. It needs to be around $400-$450 USD, since it's competition is the Sigma 1850EX and Tamron 1750Di-II.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
grego Cream of the Crop 8,819 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: UCLA More info | fStopJojo wrote: It needs to be around $400-$450 USD, since it's competition is the Sigma 1850EX and Tamron 1750Di-II. Defintely would need to pray for it to be around that price. Go UCLA
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tuan209 Member 236 posts Joined Apr 2006 Location: Houston More info | fStopJojo wrote: I just saw that link at DPR...that's a crazy price. $970 USD for a non-IS, 3rd party, 16-50 APS-C? Even a suggested retail price of $970 is incredible. We'll have to see what it actually sells for, but at even $750 USD, it won't sell 1 copy. It needs to be around $400-$450 USD, since it's competition is the Sigma 1850EX and Tamron 1750Di-II. Im with you! I rather spend a few hundred more for the Canon 17-55 with USM and IS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 15, 2006 19:44 | #35 Wow I might consider that lens. 16-50? That is excellent! I found the 12-24 from Tokina to be very sharp and similar to L quality. All I have to say about Tokina is good things thus far. Then again I've only used the 12-24 which was excellent! Christopher J. Martin
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PhotoAlien Member  107 posts Joined Sep 2005 Location: PA More info | Jul 17, 2006 17:08 | #36 |
In2Photos Cream of the Crop  19,813 posts Likes: 6 Joined Dec 2005 Location: Near Charlotte, NC. More info | PhotoAlien wrote: Suddenly Oct/Nov seem very far away.  But would make a great Christmas present. Mike, The Keeper of the Archive
LOG IN TO REPLY |
condyk wrote: I've had a 12mm and now a 15mm and I never notice I am missing the extra 3mm from my ex 12-24mm. I went to the 17-40 L and never miss the 12-16mm range, I did some testing and it was about 1 ft of difference through the lens, at 12mm it was wide, at 17mm I had to step 1 ft back to get the same wideness but the color and sharpness was better. Christopher J. Martin
LOG IN TO REPLY |
vjack Goldmember  1,602 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jul 2005 Location: Mississippi, USA More info | fStopJojo wrote: I just saw that link at DPR...that's a crazy price. $970 USD for a non-IS, 3rd party, 16-50 APS-C? Even a suggested retail price of $970 is incredible. We'll have to see what it actually sells for, but at even $750 USD, it won't sell 1 copy. It needs to be around $400-$450 USD, since it's competition is the Sigma 1850EX and Tamron 1750Di-II. I couldn't agree more. There is no way I would consider this lens unless it is priced comparably to the Sigma 18-50 and Tamron 17-50.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
kram obvious its pointless 2,612 posts Likes: 3 Joined Feb 2005 More info | Jul 18, 2006 06:07 | #40 Sigma 10-20, best of the Tokina/Tamron/Sigma 17-50, Tokina 50-135 and the 100-400L. My Dec lineup is complete.....oops I dont have any of these lenses Canon 7D , Canon 6D, 100-400 L, 24-105 F4 L, 50 F1.4, Tokina 12-24 F4, Kenko Teleplus Pro DG 1.4X Extender
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 18, 2006 07:52 | #41 After buying the 12-24 I am interested in the 16-50 2.8, mainly for IQ and build. But I am loathed to spend more money on an APS-c lens... http://natureimmortal.blogspot.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PhotoAlien Member 107 posts Joined Sep 2005 Location: PA More info | DITTO! In2Photos wrote: But would make a great Christmas present.  Although if those prices are correct I won't be buying it.:p
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 18, 2006 10:46 | #43 The Sigma can be had now for $375 and the Tamron for $430. I'd pay up to $500 for the Tokina, but that's the max.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Coco-Puffs Goldmember  1,472 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2005 More info | In2Photos wrote: But would make a great Christmas present. Although if those prices are correct I won't be buying it.They better release some prices by October b/c I plan on going back to the States for a few months and I'd like to upgrade my kit lens by then. --------------------
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Coco-Puffs Goldmember 1,472 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2005 More info | fStopJojo wrote: The Sigma can be had now for $375 18-50EXs are that cheap now? No wonder used the used ones are getting cheaper. I wonder how low they'd go by the release of this Tokina lens? --------------------
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is MWCarlsson 1135 guests, 143 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
