 |
|
|
Leon Kolenda
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 21, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $345.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, Nice Hood and Case, Pretty sharp IQ.
|
|
Cons:
|
Way to much CA, I have struggled even in Adobe's Camera raw and Lightroom to correct it.
|
|
|
|
|
 Jun 23, 2008
|
|
PJ Fish
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 24, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 18
|
|
Review Date: Dec 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
This is fine little sharp lens good design for the FOV 1,6 camera type like Canon 60D,10D,20D 30 D and alike.Good colours ,fast action and respons and very low CA on par with Canon 17-40.
|
|
Cons:
|
bad MF / AF Clutch,a little noisy
|
|
|
I used to work with this little jewel when I worked freelance for a small local newspaper,together with a Sigma Line set up of good lenses.I used this often with a Canon 10D.
For some reasons i often ended up using this little lens,because we found the pics we made with it, was very fine and sharp.
We later bought A Canon 17-40 which has more reach and better colour and maybe a better sharpness but only with a very small margin,in fact this fixed focal lens is very sharp and I think you could buy it without any reservation if you are on a budget.Hook this up with a 50mm 1,8 a 85 mm and 180 mm and you get the best pics you could ever dream of, for a fair investment.
Well-done Tokina.
|
|
|
Dec 9, 2007
|
|
Stuart Bell
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 754
|
|
Review Date: Aug 22, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, feel, weight, finish, optical quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Confusing M/F switch and clutch system on focus ring - but I use auto all the time, so not an issue. Needs better hood for 1.6 crop bodies.
|
|
|
Having started with a w/a zoom, I soon decided that I was willing to trade zoom flexibility for a better size, feel and optical quality. Needed wider than 20mm for my 1.6 crop Canon D60.
I read 'the' review of it on the www, and soon found a seller on the FM Buy-and-Sell forum. I have not regretted it one bit. Very nice to use, good to look at, and the results are good to look at, too! Some CA with twigs against a bright sky, but which lens doesn't do that? Nice colours and contrast.
The Tokina BH-775 hood for their mid-range zoom is apparently great with this lens and 1.6 crop bodies; I have one on order.
At the risk of repeating previous reports, this really is an excellent lens, especially at the price.
|
|
|
Aug 22, 2005
|
|
B_Lebsanft
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
metal mount, build quality, sharp, outresolves the 10D quite a bit
|
|
Cons:
|
MF/AF mechanism, but not a big problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2005
|
|
MASL
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 26, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 219
|
|
Review Date: Jan 27, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $339.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light, great length, solid build
|
|
Cons:
|
Not much, but with 1.6 crop the lens is not pushed with my 10D
|
|
|
I've used this lens whenever I travel and it's great for some landscape shots. A little slow for indoor work, so you need a flash, but again the 1.6 crop keeps the flash from falling off. I had tried the Sigma 15-30 without getting the quality of photo that this lens brings. 77mm makes polarizing filter costly though.
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2005
|
|
spartan123
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Nov 9, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 3683
|
|
Review Date: Jan 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
A great buy in WA lenses.
As usual Tokina comes through, I am starting to appreciate their quality and the wonderful photo's produced with their equipment.
This thing is built like a tank. Tokina IMHO is an underrated company.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2005
|
|
drisley
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1527
|
|
Review Date: Oct 28, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $370.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely well built; Sharp optics; 3 year warranty; Very affordable
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I was pleasantly surprised when I recieved the lens.
It was my first 3rd party lens, and I have to say, if I didnt know better I would say it's a Canon L lens. It's built just as solid as any L lens I've used, and includes a beautiful leather case (it's nicer than the ones Canon gives you with it's L lenses).
If you want a wide angle lens with the build and image quality of the 17-40L, but don't need zoom, and want to save lots of money, grab this lens.
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2004
|
|
lxcellent
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 1, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 62
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2004
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb build quality (better than non L Canon lenses), very good image quality for a 22 mm lens (cropped focal length)
|
|
Cons:
|
f/3.5 rating is too generous, flare sensitive
|
|
|
I use this lens quite a bit, but I always need to dial in an extra 1.0+ exposure compensation. In a sense the true f-stop really should be rated at 4.5 rather than 3.5. As a result, one needs to have a digital camera that can shoot relatively noise free up to ISO 400 if you expect to use this as a medium light photojournalist lens. If you are shooting landscapes, then no biggie.
The felt on the lens shade is also very fragile. I have lost a few bits from the front edges of the shade. I doubt that this has any impact on the images, however, so it is more of an issue of quality of materials.
The lens is very susceptible to flare. You often need to hold your hand out over the lens to prevent it from detracting from your image.
I am surprised that the other reviewers did not talk about these issues. I wonder how long they waited until they rated. I never write a lens "review" until I have used a lens for 500+ images.
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2004
|
|
solecist
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 12, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 20
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid, light and quick
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
Pretty much what everyone else said. Its a great lens. I love the size and construction especially. Its smaller than my EF 20mmUSM, and built stronger. The nikon mount which I have doesn't suffer from slow motors becuase its mechanically driven from the camera body. I loved this lens on my D100. Highly recommended. Very resistant to flare as you can see from these images: http://neilcowley.com/weddings/stories/gibson/
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2003
|
|
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
|
|
Review Date: Jun 30, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, contrast, consistent performance, resistance to flare, contrast, build, VFM.
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, zizzy and slow AF.
|
|
This has to be one of the most neglected excellent value for money lenses available for the EOS mount. Smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the UWA zooms, it has comparable image quality. Sharpness holds up excellently across the full frame (have tried this with film, too), although field curvature can fool you into thinking the corners are soft, especially with flat close-up targets. The lens is extremely contrasty and virtually impossible to get to flare badly enough to ruin a picture -- a quite an accomplishment for an UWA. There's remarkably little difference between wide-open and stopped-down, other than depth of field of course.
It's also built like the proverbial brick outhouse, with a heavy aluminum barrel, internal focusing, chromed brass lens mount, and a *very* nice manual-focusing feel.
On the down side, the lens is not optimal with the sensor on the 1Ds, 10D and D60: it exhibits visible (but not terribly distractnig) red-green CA around the edges of the frame. Interestingly, the CA goes away when shooting film or using the 1D: I suspect it has something to do with the pixel pitch or AA filter on the cameras.
Another negative is the loud and slow AF, even with the MF clutch disengaged. However, this has very little practical importance, as the depth of field is so huge even wide-open that you get more control by guesstimating subject distance anyway, even for situationals.
In other words, if you (a) don't want to pay for or (b) don't feel like hauling the weight of the UWA zooms, this is definitely a lens that merits consideration. Next to the 35/2, it's my favorite lens.
Full review with samples here: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Pontification/b_Photography/d_Tokina_AT-X_17mm/a_Tokina_AT-X_17_mm.html ]
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2003
|
|
heed
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 10, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 272
|
|
Review Date: Jun 27, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $290.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Pretty light, good build quality, durable. Tack-sharp at center, highly usable at edge. Minimal distortion.
|
|
Cons:
|
Sliding ring for selecting manual/auto focus sometimes hard to switch. Some flare problems (but to be expected w/ 17mm).
|
|
|
Metal body w/ black textured finish. Sticks to your hands very well; not slippery when slightly wet. Hood is good quality, but I wish companies would start coming out 1.6x hoods for 10D, etc. Might help with flare.
At 1.6 on 10D, edge is very sharp with only small amount of CA toward edges. Center is perfectly sharp. No more distortion than you would expect.
Full frame: edge slightly fuzzy w/ a good bit of CA.
Unbelieveable depth of field!
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2003
|
|
Griffin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 9, 2002
Location: China
Posts: 879
|
|
Review Date: Jun 6, 2003
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive; asphercial; full metal-built; sharp from f/5.6 downwards; excellent quality;
|
|
Cons:
|
sharp only from f/5.6 downwards; strange clutch MF system; AF motor is not USM nor HSM nor AF-S; some flare;
|
|
|
If you cannot afford those expensive "L" or "AF-S ED" lenses and don't mind a third-party wide-angle lens, this is one to look at. It has an apereture of f/3.5 and is quite sharp (on my D30) down from f/5.6.
Unfortunately, the AF motor is a tag noisy and slow, I guess these three problems are not an issue if you are taking landscapes. But it has some flare issues, much worse than my EF20-35mm f/2.8 L. I think if you get this lens, get an excellent filter and be careful when you shoot. Nonetheless, I would recommend it as an alternative for landscape photographers.
|
|
|
Jun 6, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
12
|
73564
|
Jun 23, 2008
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$343.43
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.40
|
9.60
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
