nikon lenses are always more pricey than 3rd parties. it has always been know the 12-24mm nikkor was way overpriced, even from the announcment of it. it's plastic bodied, and many people chose the tokina over this lens, turns out it's just as good optically. tokina is imo from what i've used, the best of the 3rd party comp's.
trenchmonkey wrote:
Please...just one thread per day per Forum, thanks!
Is this a forum rule or are you just being a jerk? I never seen anyone get called out on this and I've been an active member here for a while.
rhyder wrote:
You don't know what you paid for it? $350 or $400
I have no idea what I paid for mine either...most people could care less after they make a purchase and are happy. Is this a problem with you?
Now to actually add to this thread. They Nikon is priced higher, well, because it is a nikon lens. It has a motor in the lens and is a bit more flare resistant.
From many websites I've read that the lens designs are actually identical, but with the Nikon having more coatings and the added motor internals. This also came from a Nikon tech that I talked to at a Southern Short Course (news photography conference) I attended..I think this was the tech I talked to, but it may have been the other guy working the repair booth:
I loved my Tok and used the Nikon one when it was around (one of my photogs that worked under me had one). I never saw a reason to upgrade.
Zacks wrote: Is this a forum rule or are you just being a jerk? I never seen anyone get called out on this and I've been an active member here for a while.
It's that way on most of the FM Forums, "a courtesy" if you will...so everyone gets a chance to be on page one for awhile.
So who's bein' the jerk here, Zack Josh was hardly being called out.
I personally still don't see the point. If he had multiple threads that were pointless or just all should have gone together, then I would understand you giving him a "courtesy" as you call it. If you want to be the big dad around here, then feel free, but at least announce yourself as such prior to not adding anything to a thread that the original poster could use to help answer the question.
I personally still don't see the point. If he had multiple threads that were pointless or just all should have gone together, then I would understand you giving him a "courtesy" as you call it. If you want to be the big dad around here, then feel free, but at least announce yourself as such prior to not adding anything to a thread that the original poster could use to help answer the question.
You need to grow up. Trenchmonkey is a well respected member gently pointing out the rules of the forum.
I'm glad he's well respected, but he still added to a thread for no point just like this back and forth we are doing. A PM is the respectable thing to do. Nothing about what I wrote shows a lack of age, so please don't go there.
Maybe today I just have a chip on my shoulder today, but I actually answered the guys question.
trenchmonkey wrote:
FM Forum Rules
Rules: One new topic per day
Would you kindly point me to the rules you're quoting? Because I just read the rules, again, and found no mention of a daily topic or post limit. There's a limit of one new topic every 8 hours at the Buy & Sell board, but no limit elsewhere that I can find.
Started with the Tokina but was not happy with it. AF setup is bizarre and not always accurate. The lens had too much CA as well as a little worse IQ. Replaced it with the Nikkor, which is a better lens all around.
Started with the Tokina but was not happy with it. AF setup is bizarre and not always accurate. The lens had too much CA as well as a little worse IQ. Replaced it with the Nikkor, which is a better lens all around.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Drop it and go take some pictures........
I'm editing my post since I received a PM from trenchmonkey. Let's just say that there is no such rule and leave it at that.
To address the actual question of this thread. I tried both the Tokina and the Nikkor. I ended up keeping the Tokina, which I later supplemented with a used Sigma 10-20. I feel like I have all the performance of the Nikkor between these two, plus a lot more versatility and a backup lens to boot. In addition to the two lenses, I also have $200 cash left in my pocket, so let's call that a new 35/1.8. It's one thing to say there's a few hundred bucks difference. But it's really eye opening when you look at what you can do with even that much money.
