Looking for Wide Angle?

Well, look no further than the Tokina 17mm F3.5 lens... WOW!
I just recieved mine, and I was impressed with everything.
The leather case is nicer than the ones my Canon L lenses come in, and the build is just as good as my L lenses.
I just took 3 tests shots wide open, and boy am I impressed. The only lens I had to compare it to was the 18-50 Rebel kit lens, and this thing blows it away optically (and in every other way)! All for $360us!
Anyway if anybody is interested, I will post some test shots tomorrow when the weather is nicer.
8) 8) 8)

..............it'll be interesting to see your reactions. I initially thought of buying this lens as I do a lot of wide angle............but in the end, I just can't give up the flexibility of a zoom...........so the 17-40 found its way in my bag.

Ro1

You know I have all primes.
But, if there was any focal length that I would use a zoom, it would be the wide end. The 17-40L would have been perfect.
However, since I don't shoot wide angle that often, I like the fact that I could save $500cdn by getting the Tokina and not give up image quality.
Also, I really like the size, and the fact that it has a 3 yr warranty.
Now I can put that $$ into something else, like the 300F4L, or maybe rent

What about the Canon 35mm f1.4 L USM??? It's a very nice lens!

If it did not contain any offensive comments, then it might be a technical problem.

On the other hand, maybe the moderators conspire against you

Best regards,
Andy

Actually, Timmy, this is the 3rd time this morning I've read of someone complaining about their post being deleted. I believe it must be a technical problem.
Can you repost?

side to side the pic looks good but top to bottom .............. the bottom seems very "soft"...........

It's not soft..., it's just DOF blur... The feet are just out of focus.
The focus was on the eyes, and was shot almost wide open. The lens was almost touching the door!
I've taken other shots, and I can assure you this lens is very sharp.
In fact, some reviews rate it as being slightly sharper than the 17-40L, with less flare, and less CA.
I will post more today.

Congrats on your new toy drisley

cmM wrote:
Congrats on your new toy drisley

Thanks. I love that new lens smell!

Congradulations, drisley ! I too had been eyeing this lens for a while, before I got the Sigma 15-30 (I'm lazy, so I like the convenience of the zooms).
How's the CA performance ? Petteri Sulonen pointed that out as one of a (few) disadvantages of the Tokina 17mm in his review ...

I am giving it a go today. I just got home with some pictures and will post.
Yes, apparently there is some mild corner CA, but only on digital. It doesnt show on film at all which is weird.
But even so, in Petteri's review, he said that the Tokina's CA is still slightly better than both the Canon 16-35L, and 17-40L. Not too shabby.
I really liked the Sigma 15-30, but again, it was more money than I was willing to spend on a WA lens. Olegis, you've produced some amazing shots with that lens
Anyway, I will post some images later today.

Thanks drisley !
I'll be waiting ...

Ok, well, I "developed" the raw images, and I am very impressed.
There was only *slight* CA on one image where there was a very bright skylight with black framing. But, this was shot wide open, and was overexposed. The fringing/CA is SO MUCH better than the 18-50mm kit lens for the 300D.
Even at F4, the lens is very sharp from corner to corner. And flare? Forget about it!
There are about a dozen images posted HERE

Distortion is very mild too with this lens. Have a look at image MG_2982 above.
In this sample below, even though those lights are VERY bright, there is no fringing/CA at all!

17.0mm, f/4.0, 0.040 s (1/25), iso800

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