Does anyone own a Tokina 19-35mm

[tlucmpla]

Hi all,

Does anyone own a Tokina 19-35mm lens or for that matter ever use it before?

Please advise, I 'm thinking about getting the lens. Price between 19-35mm and 20-35mm f2.8 is more than double.

Thanks in advance.

[TME]

Originally Posted by tlucmpla Hi all, Does anyone own a Tokina 19-35mm lens or for that matter ever use it before? Please advise, I 'm thinking about getting the lens. Price between 19-35mm and 20-35mm f2.8 is more than double. Thanks in advance.

I have tried one (not use it) on a Canon camera once. But I have not actually shot with it. The general feel is that the lens feels a little antiquated and very very heavy (it's constructed almost entirely in metal I think). The zooming is done by pulling the barrel rather than turining a zoom ring. I did not like it but I think it was a rather old lens as well. Definitely not the latest iteration of the 19-35mm from Tokina. U might want to try it first before u buy? I find that I like only certain brands of lens because of the feel of the lens... and Tokina does not seem to give me that feeling..... Sigma is not too bad. But in general, I like Tamron best for 3rd party lens. 1st party, I guess u dun have a choice...... u are stuck with the brand of your body.

[thoa_rs]

Used this lens for a few jobs before, fantastic build and quality at a fantastic price.

[marcwang]

I have tried the "Plastic Fantastic" Tokina 19-35mm before once, but ONLY in the camera shop, so I cannot comment on its image quality. But the feel of the lens is pretty good. The zoom ring is nicely damped, surprisingly so.

I was contemplating this and the Tamron 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 and in the end I bought the Tamron instead due to the BETTER ratings it got on www.photographyreview.com . However, I am terribly disappointed with the Tamron. From Wide Open to f9, there is visible vignetting. The colours are rendered warmer than Nikon lenses, almost slightly too contrasty. It is lighter than the Tokina but it feels cheaper as well. It comes with a hood which the Tokina does not provide for free. On paper, it beats the Tokina FLAT because of its closer focusing, more aperture blades (cant remember if its true) and lighter weight. Sharpness is good in the centre, but my lens had a TERRIBLE softness at the edges ( anything out of a 2 CM radius from the centre on 4R photo paper). This was more evident at the lower left portion. At first I thought it was due to a shallow DOF when I shoot at wide apertures, BUT from f3.5 to f22 , this softness is evident. TERRIBLE !!!!! It has a poor resistant to flare and ghosting as well. I flashed a rock once and the reflection off a POROUS nonreflective rock caused some ghosting. However, it may be due to a lemon that I got, but it was so terrible ... I decided not to get another one.

I have heard that the Tokina is good.... but, I suggest you do some research on DPreview.com . A lot of people use it, but take note that they use DSLRs with a crop factor that does not show the soft edges. I use film.

Wide angle photography is awesome. I love the effect. But , I will AVOID the Tamron, and MAY give Tokina a chance. If you have the Cash, go for a Nikon 18-35mm or a 17-40L if u use a Canon. But if you are a poor student like me, I will not hesitate to go for the SIGMA 20mm f1.8 EX ard $500 . Freaking sharp f2.8 on. If you own a zoom lens in the 28-105mm range.... you dont really need a wide angle zoom, because you'll probably use the Wide End of a wide angle zoom anyway 99% of the time. Wide angle zooms (consumer ones) arent good at telephoto end.

[TME]

I'm using the Sigma 17-35mm EX. I love the sharpness and clarity. Colours are a little muted. The lens is well constructed but the zoom ring is rather loose IMO. At 17mm, the barrel distortion is phenomenal. Actually a good lens except for the widest end.... but I hardly use it these days... I have shot wide open and up to about f/11 only so it's sharp only at these f-stops.... dun know about f/22 or higher...

[tlucmpla]

Thanks TME and Marc for your valuable input.

I contemplated whether to buy a Sigma 20mm f1.8 and I have read the reviews given in www.photographyreview.com. It looks not too bad. But I had somewhat bad experience with Sigma. Otherwise, given the wide angle and such a bright lens and the low price. I would actually get the Sigma lens.

Tamron is out for me so basically it's Nikkor (I'm using a Nikon camera) or Tokina or Sigma.

[Papilio]

Originally Posted by tlucmpla Thanks TME and Marc for your valuable input. I contemplated whether to buy a Sigma 20mm f1.8 and I have read the reviews given in www.photographyreview.com. It looks not too bad. But I had somewhat bad experience with Sigma. Otherwise, given the wide angle and such a bright lens and the low price. I would actually get the Sigma lens. Tamron is out for me so basically it's Nikkor (I'm using a Nikon camera) or Tokina or Sigma.

Just out of curiosity, why is Tamron out for you since you're using a Nikon?

If price is an issue, and you want to use it more as a tour lens, have you taken a look at the Vivitar Series-1 19-35mm lens? Feels plasticky and cheapo (it actually is cheap!), but the results are quite acceptable for non-pro outputs.