Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens announced.

I don't know if anyone else has picked this up yet. It definitely sounds interesting, a constant f2.8 for UWA is a first I think. For crop body only.

Tokina has also announced a 35mm 1:1 macro lens for crop body only.

Seeing that the Tokina Japan website has it listed, but the US site doesn't, it will probably be a while till this gets here. The zoom range is really short, but I'm sure the quality is excellent, given how well my Tokina 12-24 performs. This isn't a lens for me (I've already got Tokina's two current wide lenses!), but it will be great news to people who have been wishing for an f/2.8 UWA for crop cameras.

Some pics:

I have to say that the 35mm macro looks just STRANGE. I guess the 35mm macro is a call back to the the 50mm macro for full frame, so I'm sure there's a market there.

As the proud owner of two Tokinas, I'm always glad to see them expand their line. They're just extremely solid lenses.

It looks like they're positioning the 11-16 to complete a three zoom lineup at f/2.8 with no overlap: 11-16, 16-50, 50-135. Not bad, and since they all have exceptional build quality, you can get a really rugged f/2.8 setup for a relatively low price.

Looks very interesting and 2.8 would be nice in a widey for indoors. I have had two toki widey's in the past and both excellent: 20-35mm 2.8 and 12-24mm 4.0.

11-16 huh! That looks interesting.

Wow, first the Sigma 10mm and now this. These are going to make it more difficult for me to justify a 5D. That's probably a good thing.

The Tamron 11-17 was a good lens IMO, so this should be even better. Definitely worth a look.

Well, I'll get it when it comes out after seeing some test images and what not.

Jman13 wrote in post #4325758
I have to say that the 35mm macro looks just STRANGE. I guess the 35mm macro is a call back to the the 50mm macro for full frame, so I'm sure there's a market there.

As the proud owner of two Tokinas, I'm always glad to see them expand their line. They're just extremely solid lenses.

It looks like they're positioning the 11-16 to complete a three zoom lineup at f/2.8 with no overlap: 11-16, 16-50, 50-135. Not bad, and since they all have exceptional build quality, you can get a really rugged f/2.8 setup for a relatively low price.

both lenses seems strange. i'm sure there'll be buyers but i don't expect mass appeal.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #4326080
both lenses seems strange. i'm sure there'll be buyers but i don't expect mass appeal.

ed rader

The 11-16 will certainly have some appeal. There are no current fast, ultra wide options on a crop. The 11-16 and the Sigma 10mm now will give crop users an ultra wide and a fisheye at 2.8. Now you don't have to spend $2500 for a 5D just to gain a stop on the wide end. If we're really lucky...maybe canon will follow suit with a couple wide EF-S lenses.

11-16 F2.8. Yummy.

bacchanal wrote in post #4326199
The 11-16 will certainly have some appeal. There are no current fast, ultra wide options on a crop. The 11-16 and the Sigma 10mm now will give crop users an ultra wide and a fisheye at 2.8. Now you don't have to spend $2500 for a 5D just to gain a stop on the wide end. If we're really lucky...maybe canon will follow suit with a couple wide EF-S lenses.

11-16 is a pretty narrow range. you'd really have to want f2.8. i believe the retail price is $800.

the canon 10-22 is a very popular lens that's wider and longer than the tokie. i don't see canon making a faster, more expensive version with a shorter range.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #4326239
11-16 is a pretty narrow range. you'd really have to want f2.8. i believe the retail price is $800.

the canon 10-22 is a very popular lens. i don't see canon making a faster, more expensive version with a shorter range.

ed rader

Honestly, I'd probably buy an 11mm 2.8 prime, so range isn't really an issue for me. And it's not that I want 2.8...I demand it. Frankly, 2.8 is slow for me, but it is much more attractive than say f/3.5 or f/4. I'd hope the street price would eventually be a little lower than the msrp, but $800 isn't outrageous for such a lens. Look at the price of the 17-40L compared to the 16-35L.