 |
|
|
rndman
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $339.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, Range, Build Quality, Price, Warranty coverage
|
|
Cons:
|
CA
|
|
|
Looking at the experience of the people I was worried about getting a bad copy. But to my luck, I received a good copy.
It feels real solid, well built. It is sharp wide open and that's the beauty. @24mm though the sharpness reduces a bit, but that is fine as mostly this will be used towards wide end.
CA is visible, but not an issue as it can be cleaned out during post processing.
I was looking for a UWA and along with Sigma 10-20, Tokina 11-16 I was considering this. I was leaning towards 11-16 and then I saw it was available for the best price.
My "wide" end is now covered. I might miss that 1mm and f2.8 sometimes, but that is ok, I guess.
|
|
 Apr 14, 2009
|
|
Richard GT
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 18, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 145
|
|
Review Date: Apr 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp wide open, great color rendition, quality build, well priced.
|
|
Cons:
|
Other than sample variation, nothing negative to say.
|
|
|
This is an excellent lens. I use it for all my needs at the wide end. The first copy I received was badly decentered. It was returned. It's replacement is sensational. Everything I could hope for and them some.
I thought about getting a Sigma 10-20mm but I need the 24mm of the Tokina more than the 10mm of the Sigma. Not at all sorry I made the choice I did.
|
|
|
Apr 8, 2009
|
|
chylld
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 8, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic lens to use, zoom and focus are entirely internal, feels solid, IQ is great, almost everything?
|
|
Cons:
|
Grainy pictures? (maybe more a body fault) and doesn't go as wide as I'd like
|
|
|
Grabbed this lens second-hand and very happy with it. I would have liked a 10mm wide end, but that would have meant going with either a Tamron or a Sigma, which haven't reviewed as well as the Tokina optically.
Had a lot of fun with the lens already, but a closer examination of the pictures shows a high amount of grain and noise; weird since I'm shooting around ISO 200-600 on my D90. That said, once the images are cleaned up and resized, they look great!
Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2009
|
|
piginmuck
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 13, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Built like a tank, sharp as a tack, great colours
|
|
Cons:
|
None yet
|
|
|
I use this underwater and it is AMAZING. I used it to replace the fisheye 10-17 which I thought was pretty good until I tried using this.
It is sharp, with superb colours, and is one hell of a lens. Makes my previous 10-17 shots look flat and lifeless. No kidding. Cannot honestly say if the Nikon version is any better, but I do not see how it could be.
Built to last, with a clutch system that doesnt seem too problematic if you have two hands and a modicum of comon sense, this lens is everything you need for those wide shots, without the fishyness of the 10-17.
Buy it.
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2009
|
|
UltraVal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 8, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Feb 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $435.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Best dSLR lens I've ever used. Great colors and sharp at most F stops.
|
|
Cons:
|
None really
|
|
|
This is a great lens. I sold mine because I can't really justify owning a lens worth this much. Instead I went for a bargain Tokina lens - the 19-35 "Plastic Fantastic".
I loved the color and image quality the 12-24 made on Canon bodies. Good glass really makes a big difference. I may possibly get another one of these some day and keep it. I don't think many people would be sorry for buying one of these.
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2009
|
|
bsirjani
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 8, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 632
|
|
Review Date: Jan 10, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $425.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid feeling! Short, semi compact. Great zoom rings.
|
|
Cons:
|
Corner distortion, probably not as ideal for architecture... I use it for portraits, so works well.
|
|
|
I was contemplating this and the sigma 10-20 but found that I needed the 20-24 range more than 10-12. I haven't been disappointed at all. F/4 is even great. Wonderful color rendition and contrast. Would definitely recommend this as a DX Wide Angle.
I use it a ton for portraits and covering school events in small spaces. Works great!
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2009
|
|
Eddie Konno
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 30, 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice rubber rings, easy to change AF/MF
|
|
Cons:
|
the first copy had to be sent back
|
|
|
I needed to send it back for repair as soon as I bought it for cracked rubber rings although it was bought new. They fixed it the next day and shipped within two days after I returned the lens.
AF/MF switch is similar to Tamron 90mm macro but when in AF, the rubber ring goes under the golden ring at the tip of the lens. This means you might get dust.
When switching between AF and MF, you may have to twist the focus ring slightly. Otherwise, you will feel a slight registance to it. When you get use to it, it is not a big deal but I wish it was as smooth as Tamron 90mm macro's.
I don't know why there is a meter/ft window while there is no f stop ranges printed. It was suppose to show you the DOF but without f stop info, it only tells you how far the subject is.
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2008
|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 631
|
|
Review Date: Dec 12, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $400.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Same as Canon mount: build, IQ, colors!
|
|
Cons:
|
No internal AF motor! Nikon mount hunts for AF
|
|
|
There's no doubt this is a great lens. Just not as happy with it as I was the Canon mount version. No less IQ than Canon version, but loud AF on my D300 and something off.
I'm going to sell after the new year and get the Nikkor version. Might not be worth the extra couple hundred bucks - but then again, it might.
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2008
|
|
berghaus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 15, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 14
|
|
Review Date: Dec 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
|
I bought this to go on my Canon 50D, I now have this Tokina 12 24 f4 Canon 24 105 L f4 Canon 100 400 L all are great and the Tokina wide angle shots are nothing short of amazing, if you have any thoughts on spending more cash on the Canon 10 22, then don't, my mate has one and OK its not bad, but, the build quality and the colours, contrast and IQ from the Tokina 12 24 wins every time, I see his jaw drop when we compare images taken from the same 50D cameras.
Save some cash, BUY IT!
|
|
|
Dec 5, 2008
|
|
Neens_wa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 86
|
|
Review Date: Nov 14, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $480.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice contrast, sharp, built like a tank, aspherical, straight f/4, not 3.5-5.6 like the others on the mkt., and finally - the cherry on top - Price!
|
|
Cons:
|
None that I can find...
|
|
|
Knowing I was about to hit some serious scenic areas for landscape photos while on a three month trip home to Texas and back, I wanted a good wide angle lens.
I'd rented the Canon 10-22, three times before for an extreme wideangle need, and just could not bring myself to use it more than for 2-3 shots each time I rented. There was nothing about the Canon lens that excited me. I'd tried the Sigma as well, and wasn't thrilled - but far more impressed than wiht the Canon.
Reading the reviews for this lens, and having a VERY tight budget, *and* desperate for a wide angle - I took the leap of faith and just bought the darn thing. This is my only third party lens, collection of lenses are 98% L glass.
I cannot say enough nice things about this puppy - it's AMAZING, and it goes with me EVERYWHERE. It's a toss up between this and my 24-70 L f/2.8.
|
|
|
Nov 14, 2008
|
|
maddog76
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality is fantastic. Works in all light conditions. Super performance.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I took a long time in choosing which wide angle lens to purchase. I have no doubt in my mind, that I made the right choice.
This lens is build like a Tank! Fanrastic feel to it.
Yes it may be a little on the heavy side, but it has a constant aperture, is very sharp and generally a great lens to own and a pleasure to use.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008
|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 631
|
|
Review Date: Oct 1, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $450.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, sharpness, versatility
|
|
Cons:
|
CA
|
|
|
Now that I've had a chance to use this baby, I really like it. I shot a car show recently and left this in my car initially, taking my Canon 24-70/2.8 and the 10-17 with me. It wasn't long before I returned and dropped off the 2 lb 24-70 and picked this up. What a difference! On a crop camera, the 24 was too long for most of the shots at the show, but this lens ends there - not begins. Plus, it's so light - despite being built every bit as solid as my brick.
Really, this lens shines in a lot of areas and I find it sits more on my 40D than I ever thought it would.
I keep thinking of making the move to Nikon (D300) and if I do, this lens will most likely have to be re-bought in the Nikon mount.
Really a terrific lens.
|
|
|
Oct 1, 2008
|
|
John Passaneau
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 58
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $499.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Constant aperture, 12mm is just wide enough, great build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Big and heavy, some CR in some lighting easy to fix in PS/LR. Zone and focus backwards from Canon, not a problem for Nikon users.
|
|
|
I just received it in the last 24 hours. I've missed true wide angles since I switched to digital. This lens gives me back the wide angles I missed. I'm impressed with the build quality. It matches the quality of my old Cannon FD lens which not even some of the L series lens can do. I shot a bunch of test shots and I've seen some CR which was easily fixed. Sharpness seems very good. It is just about impossible to focus this lens manually at 12mm with the standard screen in my 40d. But it auto focuses very well and is fast. Bottom line is I should have bought this lens sooner.
John Passaneau
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2008
|
|
ilind
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $475.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, performance, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Somewhat heavier than the Canon alternative
|
|
After hemming and hawing about the Tokina 12-24 versus the Canon 10-22 and the new Tokina 11-16, I decided to go with this lens.
After about a month of shooting, I don't regret the decision.
It's a great lens for the price. Maybe even regardless of price.
I'm not a pro but I have been around. I would hesitate to recommend this lens. A pro might find grounds to be disappointed, but for everyone else, don't worry. Be happy with this one.
Here's a link for more comments and sample photos:
http://ilind.net/reviews/tokina12-24.html
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2008
|
|
BERTPIX
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, price, build, range
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
I wasn't very sure about Tokina when I was looking around for a wideangle lens but I have to admit that their Pro-line comes very close to the L's from Canon. Confirming what other posters already mentioned, great solid build, results looks very nice, sharp at F4, interesting price and very useful range.
There are some sample pictures on my fotoblog, all landscapes and buildingsphoto's were made with this lens and a 20D :
http://bertpix.skynetblogs.be
|
|
|
Jul 25, 2008
|
|
eam873
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 21, 2008
Location: Israel
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Jul 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very solid built like an canon L lens, very useful focal range in a APS-C, very sharp, good colors and saturation, fast focus, less expensive than the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, the 24 mm is very useful
|
|
Cons:
|
Didn't find yet
|
|
Before buying this lenses I red many positives reviews and I am not disappointed, this third part lens is not worse than the competitor at a lower price, his build quality, IQ and performance are excellent, I woul not hesitate to recommend it to any photographer with an APS-C Canon camera.
Here are a few pictures taken with this lens using my old Canon 350D camera (with the canon 40D are even better)
http://www.cameralens.asia/tokina/tokina/pages/chateau_frontenac.htm
http://www.cameralens.asia/tokina/tokina/pages/IMG_3326.htm
http://www.cameralens.asia/tokina/tokina/pages/IMG_2115.htm
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
72
|
144553
|
May 25, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
90% of reviewers
|
$458.27
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.64
|
9.33
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
