Which is better in terms of quality?


Status
Not open for further replies.

shmott

New Member
Mar 24, 2002
463
0
0
46
Sin jia por lor...
Hi guys,
Which of the following is better?
1) tokina 20-35 f3.5 4.5? (orange ring, 2nd hand abt $350)
or
2)cosina 19-35 F3.5.45? (new at $300)

Just like some comments of wide angle lenses.If there are other options ard the price range of $400.Thanks.They are for my Nikon F70.
 

Ian

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
2,532
0
0
59
Perth Australia
Originally posted by shmott
Hi guys,
Which of the following is better?
1) tokina 20-35 f3.5 4.5? (orange ring, 2nd hand abt $350)
or
2)cosina 19-35 F3.5.45? (new at $300)

Just like some comments of wide angle lenses.If there are other options ard the price range of $400.Thanks.They are for my Nikon F70.
Given the choice I'd go for a used Tokina any day of the week as it's a considerably better lens than the Cosina in all respects.
 

ckiang

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
6,405
0
36
47
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
www.ckphoto.net
I second Ian's advice to go for the Tokina. I used to have the older version (72mm filter size, orange ring) and it gives quite sharp images. Only thing that's bothering me is the distortion at both ends of the zoom, very common with lenses of this class. But the Cosina is probably worse.

Alternatively, you can save up and get the Nikon AF 20-35mm f/2.8D or the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF. :devil:

Regards
CK
 

shmott

New Member
Mar 24, 2002
463
0
0
46
Sin jia por lor...
I would love to own those Nikon Wide-angle lenses.But due to financial difficulties.. i just have to go for cheaper alternatives.
Or would you think its better to get a wide angle prime? like nikon 20mm or 24 mm?Would it be more expensive than the tokina?
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
47
singapore
www.larryloh.com
Originally posted by shmott
would you think its better to get a wide angle prime? like nikon 20mm or 24 mm?Would it be more expensive than the tokina?
that depends on your preference actually. some people just prefer zoom lens for the convenience, diehards swear by the primes for sharpness. it's not necessarly cheaper, but if you compare Nikon brand lenses, primes are cheaper overall. a 17-35mm f/2.8 would cost well over 1K plus second hand. i got a 24mm f/2.8 which i got 2nd hand for about $350.

hope that helps.
 

ckiang

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
6,405
0
36
47
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
www.ckphoto.net
Originally posted by shmott
I would love to own those Nikon Wide-angle lenses.But due to financial difficulties.. i just have to go for cheaper alternatives.
Or would you think its better to get a wide angle prime? like nikon 20mm or 24 mm?Would it be more expensive than the tokina?
Sharpness aside, if you want less distortion than the above 2 lenses, go for the primes. I love my Nikkor AF 20mm f/2.8D. Costs around $800. The 24mm costs $530 if you get an equote from Cathay Photo.

Regards
CK
 

Status
Not open for further replies.