«

Anyone got any comments on tokina lenses for a dslr, thanks.

"Paul" <> wrote in message
news:41750405$0$44851$...
> Anyone got any comments on tokina lenses for a dslr, thanks.

Over the years, I've owned 5 different Tokina lenses, all with
the "AT-X" or "AT-X pro" designation. I still own three of them.
They shared a number of traits. All were solidly built, all felt
great under hand, all are somewhat prone to flare, and none came
with a decent hood. Optical performance ranged from OK (24-40
f/2.8, 28-70 f/2.6~2. through Very Good (20-35mm f/2.8, 80-200
f/2. to superb (90mm f/2.5 Macro).

Earlier this month, Tokina did announce their first "DX"
lens. Unlike other third party lens makers, though, they haven't
been announcing new versions of old designs for use with digital
SLR's. I did lend my 20-35mm to a Nikon D100 owner, who seemed
pleased with the resulting shots.

Which lens did you have in mind?

--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

> Which lens did you have in mind?

Thanks for the reply, I am thinking of one of three at the moment, 20-35mm
f2.8 or 28-70mm f2.8 or 19-35mm f3.5-4.5, which one would you prefer, thanks
again.

I've had a couple teles, a 300 f/4 and a 400 f/5.6 at-x apo. Very good image
quality for the money. These were solidly built (no plastics) but heavy.
Autofocus was not fast or quiet as many Canon lenses.

Even an old early 90's AF lens functioned properly on my dRebel. Try that
with a Sigma.
bg

"Paul" <> wrote in message
news:41750405$0$44851$...
> Anyone got any comments on tokina lenses for a dslr, thanks.
>
>

Paul escribio:

> Anyone got any comments on tokina lenses for a dslr, thanks.

Got an ATX-Pro (28-70mm) on Nikon's DSLR. Good image for a off-brand
zoom, very good build! (i smashed the lens into a wall (don't ask why
), and still working!

--
chidalgo

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:53:16 +0100, "Paul" <>
wrote:

>Thanks for the reply, I am thinking of one of three at the moment, 20-35mm
>f2.8 or 28-70mm f2.8 or 19-35mm f3.5-4.5, which one would you prefer, thanks
>again.

Since I've never touched a 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5, I can't say too much
about it. The 20-35mm f/2.8 is a nice lens, but on a dSLR with an
APS-sized sensor you end up with a fairly boring focal range.

I believe the current 28-70mm f/2.8 has the same optics as my older
model. Wide open on a film SLR, it's decidedly soft in the corners.
With an APS-sized sensor this is less of an issue, and the lens
covers the normal and portrait ranges nicely. However, since it was
introduced the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 has been getting consistently
better reviews. I do know that the last time I was dragged off for
family portraits, the pro used the Tamron on a D60.

--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.

"Paul" <> wrote in message news:<41750405$0$44851$>...
> Anyone got any comments on tokina lenses for a dslr, thanks.

I once had a 28-80 /2.8 ATX Pro for a week and promptly returned it.
The stupid thing would always front focus and was soft even with manual
focus, unless stopped down to f/5.6. Probably a bum lens. It was build
like a tank, but the optics probably came from the same company which
makes coke bottles. I once used their 100 (or was it 105mm) macro lens
which was very good. However the tamron 90 proved to be better. Frankly
I have never used a tokina lens whose optics were great compared to the
competition.