Originally posted by tsdh
CK, which fast-lens do you have in mind to replace yours?
Ideally, the AFS 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF but not enough $$$ so I probably have to settle for the Tokina version.
Regards
CK
Originally posted by tsdh
CK, which fast-lens do you have in mind to replace yours?
Last year I bought that Tokina (ATX Pro II, latest version), but finally I sold it because too soft at its widest aperture. And now stick back to my old Nikkor 35-70/2.8Originally posted by ckiang
Ideally, the AFS 28-70mm f/2.8D ED-IF but not enough $$$ so I probably have to settle for the Tokina version.
Regards
CK
Same with you, I hate the range of just 35-70 (and its bad bokeh), that's the reason I bought Tokina 28-70. Unfortunately, the result is not up to my expectation of a pro-grade lens.Originally posted by ckiang
The 35-70/2.8 is a great lens, but I hate the range. Neither here nor there. And if I get it, I'd desperately need a lens to fill the gap between my 20 (widest) and this 35-70. 17-35/20-35 is going to be quite prohibitive in price. 24 or 28 prime sounds doable, but is still an extra cost. So 28-70 range will be nice
Would be excellent if Nikon has a 28-70/2.8 non AFS, but they don't
Regards
CK
Originally posted by tsdh
Same with you, I hate the range of just 35-70 (and its bad bokeh), that's the reason I bought Tokina 28-70. Unfortunately, the result is not up to my expectation of a pro-grade lens.
I can't justify the cost of AFS lenses, since I don't need such fast AF speed. For the time being, I fill in the wide-end with a Nikkor 18-35/3.5-4.5 (and 24/2.8 prime if hi-quality is required).
The Tokina is great for its price, its build is solid.
If you buy this lens, test its AF at close distance (around 1m or less), see whether the focus slightly miss or not. Some batch doesn't work well with Nikon, its AF will miss around 1cm near the minimum focusing distance.
Originally posted by Kho King
Tokina already has the 28-80mm pro, why people still considering buying the 28-70mm pro II? Is the Pro II better optically? Or is it because of price? :dunno:
Originally posted by Kho King
The Pro II minimum focusing distance is 70cm, the pro 28-80mm is 50cm (much higher magnification for close up wide angle shot). This is the main reason I like the pro 28-80mm, besides the af/mf switch and the little window on the lens.
Ck, r u buying new or 2nd hand?
Originally posted by ckiang
Splitting thread into a new thread as it's getting OT.
Hmm... slight but noticeable difference. Think for the kind of price, I can probably live with it.
The 35-70/2.8 is a great lens, but I hate the range. Neither here nor there. And if I get it, I'd desperately need a lens to fill the gap between my 20 (widest) and this 35-70. 17-35/20-35 is going to be quite prohibitive in price. 24 or 28 prime sounds doable, but is still an extra cost. So 28-70 range will be nice
Would be excellent if Nikon has a 28-70/2.8 non AFS, but they don't
Regards
CK
It is ok at f5.6 and above. Altough most of the time we may not shoot at f2.8, but it defeat the purpose of using the big and heavy f2.8 lens if it can't perform well whenever we need it.Originally posted by Minority
If I may add I did some research the tokin ATX 280 is pretty ok if you shoot from f4 and above. But most of the time you don't have to shoot at f2.8 right. ( well would be nice if its perfect. But the price diff -- me comparing to the Canon 28-70L ) its my understanding that its real or if not equally sharp ( compared to the Canon L lens) from 5.6 onwards. For 1/3 the price...... could be tempting..
Originally posted by ninelives
ckiang, this lens is not that good. u might want to reconsider.
wait untill u see my slide lor, show u next time lar.Originally posted by rueyloon
care to elaborate ?
Originally posted by ninelives
wait untill u see my slide lor, show u next time lar.
tot u only interested in Nikon ? ;p
Originally posted by Minority
If I may add I did some research the tokin ATX 280 is pretty ok if you shoot from f4 and above. But most of the time you don't have to shoot at f2.8 right. ( well would be nice if its perfect. But the price diff -- me comparing to the Canon 28-70L ) its my understanding that its real or if not equally sharp ( compared to the Canon L lens) from 5.6 onwards. For 1/3 the price...... could be tempting..
Originally posted by beachbum
anyone used the sigma 28-70 f2.8 EX version? how is it?
i am also thinking of getting a good mid range zoom to replace my EF28-105 usm. cheers