Tokina 17mm ATX Pro Size & Weight

I've been asked by a few people about the size and weight of the Tokina 17mm ATX Pro wide angle lens.
Well, it feels like it weighs about 50% more than my 420EX flash.
As far as size goes, here is a picture beside the 50F1.8II (both with reversed lens hoods).
I hope this will help some people.
Also, click this link to see a picture of the entire lens kit contents.

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

Thanks drisley !
Now I'm convinced that I NEED this lens ...

It's so small ...

MAN Dris........


Is this like your 2401 post regarding the Tokina?!?!? LOL.....Just kidding.. ...I may be getting either that lens (because of your praises) or the 10-20mm Canon for Christmas .

NICE!!! I actually got to try this lens out in person.

I needed a cheap wide angle lens and it was between this and the Sigma 20 f1.8. I have to say though, this lens is really built like a tank. Focusing is SMOOTH!!! I think as smooth or smoother than my old 17-40 L. In the end though, I ended up getting the Sigma 20 f1.8. WHY?? here's why:

I love the 17-40 f4L!!! It's just the perfect walk around lens (27-65 on a 1.6 body). I know that when I broke my old one that I will be replacing it no matter what. The versatility, the sharpness and the color - this lens has everything. If the Tokina lens was 2.8, I might have considered it...but its max apt is only 3.5 - almost similar to the Canon zoom

So in the end, only because of the Sigma's max apt of 1.8 (something the Canon zoom could not replicate) - I ended up getting the Sigma Am I glad I got it??? yes...........it is not sharp at 1.8 but its there if you need it. At 2.8 though, it is already sharp.......and for a wide angle, I can handhold it even on 1/15 TV.

Okay, enough rambling!!! The Tokina is no slouch. I went home to look at the pics I got...........and they are very very good!!! impressive indeed.

Ro1

roanjohn wrote:
The versatility, the sharpness and the color - this lens has everything. If the Tokina lens was 2.8, I might have considered it...but its max apt is only 3.5 - almost similar to the Canon zoom

So in the end, only because of the Sigma's max apt of 1.8 (something the Canon zoom could not replicate) - I ended up getting the Sigma Am I glad I got it??? yes...........it is not sharp at 1.8 but its there if you need it. At 2.8 though, it is already sharp.......and for a wide angle, I can handhold it even on 1/15 TV.

ARGH!!!!!!!

Now Im totally confused.........Im looking for a nice wide angle lens for landscape, etc. The kit lens is OK for shots inside, parties etc.....but really not sharp enough for my liking in the field.

Reading the past few threads regarding a good wide angle, (I want pretty wide) I thought I would get the Sigma 15mm fisheye, then use the crop software like Kenski.....Then I saw the pics taken by Drisley and RbnDave.....said to myself.....looks like this is the one for me.....

NOW RoanJohn has me completely baffled.......maybe I want that 2.8 vs the 3.5...but will the 20mm not be wide enough......Grrrrrrrrrrrr

here, http://www.photozone.d​e/2Equipment/easytxt.h​tm#F24 the Tokina s optics are considered average (look EXCELLENT though with Drisleys/RbnDaves pics), while the Sigma is rated POOR. This site is usually on the money too..........

RoanJohn.....
Post some pics with the Sig please?

Tokina Post #2402 :

Olegis, yes I too love how portable this lens is. That really is a clincher isn't it.
I'm not sure why photozone gave it only average rating.
The Tokina is close to the 17-40L in sharpness, and much better in distortion, flare resistance, and slightly better in regards to chromatic abberation.
Oh well, that is why I posted pictures (and a couple 100% pics) for people to make their own judgements. What I find optically pleasing, others may not.
Again, here is 100% #1
And 100% image #2
And 100% image #3

drisley wrote:

Tokina Post #2402 :


I'm not sure why photozone gave it only average rating.

Looking at your pics Dris, I dont know either..........they look pretty sharp to me.