Photoshop actions

  Reviews by: Flav  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Flav to your Buddy List
Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX SD

Review Date: Jul 31, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Good sharpness, amazing when stopped down, Infinity stop (this is rare for AF lenses, and it's very precise on this lens), solid build, very little distortion for the zoom range and the price.
BAD Quality control. Electric band (connecting mount to lens electronics) gets damaged from zooming - it's crazy that they launched it to market like this. I bought the lens with the damaged electric band (aperture was stuck half-closed) and focus is really slow because of this defect. Now the lens works fine, except slow AF, and f/5.6 gets Err99, only f/5.6 does that - weird. This might not happen to your lens, but since there are quite a few out there that have this, I'd say be weary, check the screws if it's been open (that might indicate it did have the fault and it might happen again, soon).

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

Review Date: Jul 31, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharpest lens wide open i've ever used.
Noisy AF, vignette wide open, some distortion, more than i like for a prime, the coating could be better.

+It might be the sharpest wide angle lens I've ever used. It blows 24-70 I out of the water in this regard.
But of course, for any advantage you have a few disadvantages, otherwise everyone would have this lens.

-For me the most annoying thing is the rudimentary AF and build. It feels cheap, i'm afraid to touch the focus when in AF, because i feel i might break the plastic gears inside. The toy car noise of the AF is very unnerving and front element is somewhat exposed.

+Because of it's plastic construction it's amazingly light, making it superb for traveling (this would be my first lens i'd put at 2.8 from close to infinity). I'd pair it with a 50 and a 100/2.8 and you have a cheap, sharp light travel kit. I'd take these 3 over the 24-105 to be honest.

-The coating is mediocre, i felt like shooting with a b/w era lens, with AF and made of plastic. I don't understand why Canon would go from SSC to whatever they put on this lens, it's the same colors as the 50/1.8 and just a little better build quality, but the AF is just as noisy, if not worse.

+with today's post processing that allows for very fine adjustments of color hue and subtle nuances, the mediocre coating isn't a big problem. The alternatives might be much more expensive and not as sharp.

Tokina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 AF 193

Review Date: May 20, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: $200.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Cheap, Ultrawide (specially on FF), sharp-ish when stopped down, robust and light.
Slow af, specially in low-light. This lens is good only for outside shooting with plenty of light.

The only situation in which i recommend this is on your film(hobby) camera. By no means should it be used in a professional job - it's too slow, specially in dark places. It does ok with flash i guess.
Great for a film camera, digital too (but not really that impressive wide angle... 19 is not ultra-wide on APS-C). Haven't tried on a 5D yet, but it does good on film so far.
It might be more expensive, but get a Canon 20mm or Nikon 20mm (or even a manual wide-angle - you could focus faster than this in low light by hand), b/c 35mm end is not sharp at all on this one and not worth mentioning/using.

Overall: do not buy this lens, get a fixed focal lenght.