 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5
|
|
|
|
Hillmont
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 25, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Build, Price
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I've had the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for just over 2 weeks, it's tac sharp right from f2.8, build quality is superb with a very smooth zoom ring.
I paid £400 which for an f2.8 UWA lens of this quality is a steal.
Used on a Nikon D300
|
|
 May 25, 2008
|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 689
|
|
Review Date: May 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $570.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid Build, very nice zoom and focus rings, top quality IQ, constant 2.8, hood included
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
|
I was excited about getting an UWA and after careful consideration, I selected the Tokina 11-16. The Canon 10-22 didn't have the build, the constant 2.8 or the IQ of the Tokina - and cost a premium as well. Not to mention no hood.
That said, the Tokina has not disappointed. Fast, accurate AF with excellent IQ from wide-open. As some have said on the forums, this isn't so much a zoom (with the limited range) as a 2.8 prime with several focal lengths!
|
|
|
May 19, 2008
|
|
Kibsgaard
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 214
|
|
Review Date: May 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp from f. 2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
See below
|
|
|
Have shot with this lens 2 days now.
My findings:
Sharp allready from f. 2.8.
Sharper than Nikon 12-24 (from f.4 and down in the area 12-16), but Nikon 12-24 is more versatile - goes to 24mm and here - at 24 mm - the Nikon 12-24 shines.
As sharp in the center as the new Nikon 14-24 allready from f. 2.8, but not in the corners - the Nikon14-24 is a clear winner here.
Flare/ghosting: Worse than Nikon 12-24, but better than Nikon 14-24.
About the same, maybe less CA, than Nikon 12-24.
---
Today I suddenly could not get AF, whatever - turning of and on, but then took the lens off and mounted it again, and then the AF was OK again.
I have experienced that with one or two Nikon lenses, too, when the lenses was new, and I hope it is the same:
Some tiny metal in the new lens has to worn off.
|
|
|
May 18, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
67
|
168305
|
Jul 10, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
90% of reviewers
|
$591.30
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.40
|
9.16
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
