Jump to content

Nikon vs. Tokina 12-24mm/f4 DX


mfpow

Recommended Posts

Im looking to buy a 12-24mm f4 for my D200. Everyone seems to agree that

Nikons 12-24mm f4 is a great lens, but at a cost of neary $1000, how much

better is it than the Tokina 12-24mm f4 at about half the price.

any thoughts or insights on the comparison of these two lenses would be

appreciated. thanks.

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine has a Canon 20D with the Tokina 12-24/4 and gets fantastic images. I played around with it and it seems to be very well made. Looking at her images I cannot see that the Nikon would be any better. Personally I would get the Tokina if it was my money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get the Tokina. I have one and I love it. Additionally Tokina seems to have a better QC than e.g. SIGMA where it seems to be pure luck whether you get an orange or a lemon (in my definition, if a lemon is something bad, some other fruit must be good, I chose the orange). However if you also want to do 35 mm or FF photography, consider the Sigma 12-24 which unlike both the Nikon and the Tokina (and contenders) is desinged for FF. Keep in mind that no lens is optimal at the limits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"However if you also want to do 35 mm or FF photography, consider the Sigma 12-24 which unlike both the Nikon and the Tokina (and contenders) is desinged for FF. Keep in mind that no lens is optimal at the limits."

 

could someone explain how the sigma is designed for 35mm of FF, while the others are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I compared a Tokina & Nikkor 12-24, image results is a toss.

 

See for yourself, but slight focus or other variables will make one edge the other, it's very close.

 

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/NIK%2014%20F.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/TOK%2014%20F.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/NIK%2014%20R.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/TOK%2014%20R.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/NIK%2014%20L.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/premierevue/posting/TOK%2014%20L.jpg

 

What is not close, is the ergonomics; the Tokina is WAY better big zoom & focus rings, the Nikkors are hidden in the lens, I imagine the frustration on someone shooting with gloves in colder climate.

 

Also the built quality of the 12-24 Tokina is amazing for the price.

 

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tokina 12-24 is not an AF-S lens, while Nikkor is. However, the AF focus of Tokina 12-24 is very fast, so I do not think anyone would even notice focusing speed difference between Nikkor 12-24 and the Tokina. Short focal length lenses do not need much movement to focus, and the Tokina AF is fast for all types of shooting, including action.

 

Comparing to Sigma lens mentioned, Sigma is slower with the F-STop at max tele position, and that affects focusing in low light, as well as low light photography. There were reports of Sigma compatibility problems with Nikon DSLR dodies, I believe that was solved already ?, someone may need to verify this.

 

For the US$500 Tokina 12-24/4 AF is as good as it can get, for the time being. Paying $1000 for Nikkor will give you personal satisfaction, and perhaps nothing else beyond that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank if you look at the conclusion in the nikonians review the nikkor is the winner if money is not concerned. Also many (like me) got used to override the AF mechanism - a nice feature of the HSM design.

 

I agree with all those who conclude that the price difference will be the key issue considering that the differences are small. I like my Nikkor a lot. If the Tokina would have been out at the time I got my zoom I might have taken it under condition of testing first - I hate to spend less for a lemon.

 

A comment on the quality control: I do have no experience with Tokina but the Sigma here in Germany seem to do a good job and what I hear from the US they seemed to settle all compatibility issues to satisfaction. Still you have a high chance to need the service for wide angle zooms because quality control cost a lot and may explain part of the lower prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No contest when you consider price. IMO, the Tokina is a tad better at color rendition. Yes, you guessed it, I have the Tokina. BTW, the guy everyone loves to hate (obviously made a big impression if I can't remember his name) who has the website dedicated to Nikon did a curvature corrections chart for the superwide zooms. The Tokina was the only one which could be corrected at all apertures. I find that WO, most of the time I need no PS lens correction.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree, Tokina 12-24/F4 is the half price of Nikon one and, it is absolutely NOT half performance of Nikon. Certainly Nikon one is better, but from the result from those magizine and user reviews, perhaps Nikon is not 'far better' than Tokina.

 

Of course, if you are rich enough to afford Nikon, go and get it, otherwise choose Tokina and you will not regret. The only obvious problem of Tokina one is the flare problem i think...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Nikkor 12-24mm/f4 AF-S G can cover the full 35mm film frame (e.g. in the F100 SLR) from about 18mm to 24mm. In that sense it is compatible with the F100. When you zoom below 18mm, you'll gradually get more and more vignetting. Since it is a G lens, you need a body with a sub-command dial (or one with that functionality multiplexed, e.g. the D50) to control the aperture.

 

Someone with the Tokina can fill in the equivalent details.

 

BTW, you can get the Nikon version for below $900, so the Tokina is not quite half the price, but it is close:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=449241&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too considered the Tokina 12-24 f/4, and I think between the Nikon and the Tokina, it's a "no brainer" due to the cost. I don't think the extra $450 for the Nikon is worth it. Also, don't count out the Sigma 10-20 f/4.5-5.6. Between the Sigma and the Tokina, I liked liked the extra 2mm on the wide end, and also the HSM focusing motor. Tokina has a screw drive. Of course you have the extra stop advantage with the Tokina.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...