 |
|
|
Geoff_K
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Jan 28, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $275.00
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid Build
Feels good on the camera weightwisse
Looks professional
|
|
Cons:
|
soft across the board.
|
|
|
I tried this lens out for kicks at a HS basketball game. I usually use my sigma 50-150, but wanted to see if this lens was as soft as i felt it was. When I pulled the images up on photoshop cs, the softness was immediately obvious. I did not even have to zoom to see it.
I sent it in to THK USA for repairs (btw their customer service is FANTASTIC). Super fast responses to my emails, within hours of sending.
The reply they sent me said ...
This lens is working within specifications for a FILM camera. Digital cameras are more demanding on a lens.
On a positive note, they did not charge me to check it out. I was thinking they would charge me the $70.00 base fee.
I would not recommend this lens to anyone. I did a quick sharpness test between this lens and my kit 18-135 at f5.6. the tokina lost to that kit lens. why keep a heavy lens like this one that cant even beat a wider and longer lens ?
sadly this copy will end up on ebay and i will start my quest for a replacement.
|
|
 Jan 28, 2010
|
|
thelit21
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 8, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 9, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $280.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Unsurpassed price-to-performance ratio
Great color, bokeh and sharpness (@28-50mm
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft @80mm F2.8, okay by F4 (fixable with PS USM)
|
|
|
My copy of 280PRO focuses spot-on with my Sony A700 body with fast and reassuring AF. Sharpness is as good as my previous Tamron A09 except at the tele end, where the Tokina is noticeably soft at F2.8. There is almost a "halo effect" to the softness, which can be partially suppressed by using USM in Photoshop. Compared to an older version of the Nikkor AF-S 28-70/2.8 that I own, the 280PRO lens has comparable if not better handling and build quality, and is vastly superior to the Tamron. Real life performance is also very similar, with a slight edge going to 280PRO in AF speed and to Nikkor in flare control. All in all, a very impressive offering from Tokina considering its modest price tag.
|
|
|
Jun 9, 2009
|
|
inukshuk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 27, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 61
|
|
Review Date: Feb 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Pro Build Quality, Smooth and fast Focus and Built like a tank.
|
|
Cons:
|
None Yet.
|
|
|
Have to admit that after reading some revues especialy concerning the weight, I was stunned at how heavy it is. Weight wise I can compare it to my 70-200 f/2.8. One thing for sure is you feel like you've got something in your hands. Doesn't feel like a toy. It has a lot of oumph. I just got it so have only tried it indoors with and without the flash. So far very smooth and fast focusing. I like the pull-push for the AF-MF. Nice and fast when you need it. The zoom has a slight delay or loosness when you start but gone immediately.
After I get used to it I'll have to decide if I part with my 18-50 f/2.8?
No rush though.
Hard to find new oe used ones. I got this new from Microlobe in the UK.
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2008
|
|
adamo99
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 21, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 370
|
|
Review Date: Mar 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, excellent sharpness wide open between 28-50mm
|
|
Cons:
|
a bit soft wide open at 80mm
|
|
|
This lens is built like a tank. It does not extend when you zoom (which I far prefer), and the front element does not rotate - so using CPLs are a breeze.
Focus speed on a pro body is very good. It might not be AF-S/USM fast, but I've never missed a shot due to the AF not being fast enough. Plenty quick for most people.
Sharpness wide open from 28-50mm rivals my 50mm f/1.4D. It's a tiny bit soft wide open at 80mm, but is excellent again stopped down to f/4.
An excellent value for the money, and highly recommended.
|
|
|
Mar 4, 2007
|
|
Paul Heskes
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 31, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 153
|
|
Review Date: Aug 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
quality build, great feel, sharp, fairly fast and quiet, nice bokeh, nice hood although a little tight.
|
|
Cons:
|
almost useless aperture ring lock. plastic filter thread sometimes binds "always with Heliopan but never with Hoya"
|
|
|
I bought this new for a great price after reading some hot and cold reviews on the web, so I was a little apprehensive as to the end results on both my digital and film cameras. However this lens has never failed to please in the year that I have owned it.
There is a very limited d.o.f with this lens on the wider apertures, which I think can confuse "some" people into thinking it is very soft under f5.6 if they happen to get the focus slightly wrong, I can't say I have witnessed any 'C.A' problems with it and the colour rendition is very good.
One small annoyance is the 'aperture ring lock switch', which sometimes disengages and produces error messages, but that's a small price to pay and simple to resolve.
It comes with a handy zip case and a very nice hood, which can be a pretty tight fit at first. Other than that, I find it to be a great, sharp all rounder that's an absolute bargain for the price. I do think there may be some quality control issues though, as not everyone who complains about the softness can be wrong, so if you get the chance to try before you buy then do so and you won't be disappointed with a good copy.
|
|
|
Aug 23, 2006
|
|
rslee
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 57
|
|
Review Date: Jul 27, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $320.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, Price, and FEEL
|
|
Cons:
|
Front Focusing, CA
|
|
I got this used on Ebay.
I had it serviced at Tokina, USA to make sure everything is in working order. After getting it back, I ran series of test against Canon 24-70L.
For the price, this is an excellent lens. Aside from CA issue, picture quality is almost as good as Canon 24-70L. However, it front focused a bit and could be corrected had I sent it one more time.
Instead, I ended up selling and keeping the Canon 24-70L. This was 6 months ago.
Now, I still miss this lens for the FEEL. Yes, feeling will not help on the IQ but it sure helps in motivation department 
I might just pick up another one.
|
|
|
Jul 27, 2006
|
|
vince
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Location: China
Posts: 306
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Built like it will survive a nuclear holocaust.
|
|
Cons:
|
Front focusing problems with my camera, soft till f/5.6-6.3.
|
|
|
I bought this lens a while ago before I blew my bank balance on the 28-70L. This is a cheap way to get a solid well built f/2.8 mid range zoom.
Sadly my lens left a lot to be desired. It would consistently front focus on both my film cameras (Elan 7) and the 300D, though it worked fine on an older EOS-5. Since I bought this second hand, there was no warranty.
Maybe my copy was not very good, but the lens was soft till f/5.6. Surprising, but my old 28-105 canon zoom was sharper than this lens, wide open.
I sold it after a bit of use. Why lug around a heavy f/2.8 lens when you can't use it at f/2.8 and it front focuses? I got a 28-70L and have been very happy with that.
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2006
|
|
imadethis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 20, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
cheap, will take pictures, solid build
|
|
Cons:
|
not sharp at all, worthless pictures for print, might work okay for web content
|
|
|
At the beginning of my photography, I was searching for a budget lens to start off with. I began with a Tokina 28-80mm on a canon 20D as my walk around lens. Pictures came out not at all sharp. We're not talking about RAW photos being edited here, but jpegs with in camera sharpening even when using a tripod. It would not be possible to salvage these photos photoshop.
I will now probably cave in and save up for the Canon 24-70mm which has top notch reviews.
After beginning and using this lens for so long, I began to think there was something wrong with my 20D. I then purchased a Tokina 12-24mm, and finally, that was an amazing lens in comparison--this lens is extremely sharp and contrasty! Guess the 20D is okay afterall.
Other lenses I use:
Tokina 12-24mm f/4.0
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Tokina 80-200mm f/2.8
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2006
|
|
SJMD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 15291
|
|
Review Date: Jun 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $455.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, extra 10 mm from 70 to 80. Works with my digital rebel, 20d and 5D. Focus is great.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not a cannon - but 1/3 the price for a great built lens. Almost as sharp, you have to pixil peek to see any difference.
|
|
|
This is a GREAT lens. Much better than offerings from the other lens makers. For the money a great value. Smooth focus, the manual focus is faster than looking down for a switch to flip. On a 20D this is a super lens. Fine on the 5D but the range did not work as well for me.
God bless
sj
|
|
|
Jun 8, 2006
|
|
Areta
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 19, 2005
Location: Poland
Posts: 334
|
|
Review Date: May 16, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
feels and looks quality, nice hood, color ok, clever MF/AF switch
|
|
Cons:
|
optics and sharpness below 5.6, heavy and large
|
|
|
I really wanted to like this lens hating pricing of canon 24-70.
I liked its looks and feel a lot. Much better then nice tokina 12-24/4.
I have done some quick testing which confirmed that it is somewhat soft at 2.8, but reasonably good at 5.6.
Still I was not satisfied with my photos. I finally done some more extensive testing and find out that my lens backfocuses. What was more it was very soft from 50 to 80, much softer then 28-50, backfocus could not be blamed here.
My conclusions are:
-it is not exactly cheap, tamron 28-75/2.8 is here and takes cheaper filters (67 instead of 77), it is also widely believed to be opticaly superior
- it is nothing close optically to canon 24-70, canon is very clever design (hood / zoom), has weather sealing, focuses faster
I finally sold it and never looked back. Sorry but I cannot recomend it.
|
|
|
May 16, 2006
|
|
M.T.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 18, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 118
|
|
Review Date: Apr 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Solidly built, zoom and focus rings are smooth, like an L lens rather than a prosumer Canon lens. Optics are great, sharp, flare well controled, little distortion.
|
|
Cons:
|
NONE (well focusing is not USM fast but its pretty darn good!)
|
|
|
A fantastic lens that is solidly built, fast/quiet, and screams quality. I've been very impressed with the results and just the optics in general. A great lens at a great price! Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2006
|
|
Bullhead
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 19, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Mar 31, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, image quality,contrast,saturation of colour,quite fast I could go on and on !
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as quick as the Nikon equivalent but a whole lot cheaper to buy !
|
|
|
Well I've been pleasantly surprised by this lens after some of the negative reviews that I've read ! I've found this lens to be very,very good, except when used at 2.8 and then yes it is a bit soft but there again some people like the soft look on portraits but it's not an issue for me. Build quality is excellent no argument about that and the lens feels like a quality bit of kit unlike some Sigma lens's which I've had, although they were good lens's they just didn't have the same Pro build quality or feel of the Tokina 28-80 ! optically I think this lens is either vastly underrated by big name brand snobs or there are some bad ones kicking about ! this is based on the reviews I've seen which can vary a lot, some people love this lens some dislike it with a vengeance ! I love it, sharp,reasonably quick with lovely colours and saturation in my opinion. Again this could vary with each lens if reviews are to be believed ! If you are lucky enough to get a good one you'll love it I'm sure,just like me.
|
|
|
Mar 31, 2006
|
|
FishFoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 7, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Mar 1, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 3
|
|
Pros:
|
Cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
Cheap, Soft
|
|
|
Soft, Soft, Soft.
Bought this lens thinking I was saving about $800 over the Nikon 28-70 but getting about the same thing. Went to shoot a job in Iceland, lots of landscapes and open vista shots with models in foreground. Returned to the US and promptly returned the lens to the dealer.
If you don't shoot chromes and you don't edit on a light table with a good loupe and you don't sell any shots then this lens may be ok for you, it is significantly cheaper than the "name brands". If you care about sharpness though, save a bit longer or dig a little deeper, this glass just doesn't cut it.
|
|
|
Mar 1, 2006
|
|
Kent_Photo
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Dec 11, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 328
|
|
Review Date: Aug 7, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness excellent. Flare well controlled. Autofocus speed adequate. Contrast and color excellent. Price for performance top notch.
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy. Canon 24-70 f2.8 is faster focusing, slightly sharper and better contrast, but about same weight and 3 times the cost.
|
|
|
This has been my normal lens for 4 years on Canon A2, 10D and 20D bodies. I have thought of other lenses at various times and rented a Canon 24-70 for a wedding. I still like this lens a lot.
|
|
|
Aug 7, 2005
|
|
terrier boy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 12, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Super build quality. Nice weight and size. I don't like "fly-away"lenses.
Very sharp at f5.6 and smaller. Lovely bokeh. Manual focus is very smooth and well dampened. This lens handles like a dream.
|
|
Cons:
|
The lock on my apeture ring could be more secure. It pops out on occasion. I don't like the front cap, but one of my Bostons did! Auto Focus is just a tad noisy, but I have heard worse.
|
|
|
I bought this lens with my D100 because the price was right and it gave me f2.8. I really didn't expect too much as my style was geared more to my 80-200mm Nikkor. I was pleasantly suprised with the results however.
Then I got a D2X and when I saw the results from this modest lens I was floored! It is now my go to lens when I really want to get the shot.
Needless to say, I now own the Tokina 300mm 2.8 ATX pro and will be looking for more of the same kind of "Bang for my Buck" that Tokina offers.
P.S.
Technical Specs and charts are great for Engineers & Magazine reviews, but it's the picture that does it for me.
|
|
|
May 12, 2005
|
|
MalcRaggett
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 6, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Optically excellent. Lighter weight than Nikon pro 28-70 f2.8. One third the price of the Nikon equivalent
|
|
Cons:
|
mechanical rather than electronic focusing
|
|
|
I tested this lens against the Nikkor 28-70 f2.8 pro lens (I take this as the gold standard) and it is optically indistiguishable for practical purposes, except wide open, when there is a little vignetting (this only applies to film - a DX sensor is small enough to avoid this). It is lighter in weight but still solidly built. Switching to manual focus by pulling the focusing ring back is a useful feature (saves fiddling with the switch on the camera body).
The only negative, compared to the Nikon, is the mechanical focus, which is slower than the Nikon's electronic focus. Occasionally I have had to re-mount the lens on the camera to get the focusing mechanism to engage. But at a third the price of the Nikon f2.8, this is a really good lens. Optically superb - you would need to go to prime lenses to get better performance.
|
|
|
Apr 2, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
20
|
114241
|
Jan 28, 2010
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
75% of reviewers
|
$360.77
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.10
|
8.80
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
