Tokina 17-35 f4 vs Nikon 17-35 f2.8

<p>Hello, I have been looking at the nikon17-35 f2.8 to replave a nikon 20-35 f2.8 AF D I sold a year ago. i loved the build quality of that lens.</p>

<p>Are there any forum members who are using the new <strong>17-35 f4 lens Tokina</strong>? Ken Rockwell says that the Tokina is great. But then again he states in all his sharpness tests that resolution is not important? (to HIM maybe!).<br>

I have seen from web sample images that Tokina 17-35 f4 has amazing low distortion, but i am concerned about critical resolution capbilities at 17mm and 35mm wide open throughout the frame.<br>

But there is still no scientific resolution tests such as on dpreview, DxO, or Photozone.de for this lens yet.</p>

<p>Any real world <strong>user</strong> input - as oppsed to conjecture based on interpolating Tokina's previous offerings - anyone can do that :) - appreciated. Thanks</p>

<p>On the Tokina web site, it shows as a 16.5-135mm. If they make a 17-35, it's not listed. They do make a 16-28mm, however.</p>

<p>Robert, Tokina definitely offers a 17-35mm f4 lens.</p>

<p>Robert, that's a completely different lens. The 16.5-135mm is a midrange zoom for crop sensor cameras (such as the D90 or D7000), comparable in market position to the Nikon 18-105mm VR. The 17-35mm absolutely exists, and it's role is a wide-angle zoom for full frame cameras (i.e. the D700 or D3). You are free to verify this fact with a cursory google search. Andre, I am not a full frame DSLR user and don't have experience with this lens, but given Tokina's track record, I would assume that it's a solid performer. Look at how thoroughly their 11-16mm lens has won everyone over, I don't think I've read one negative thing about it, and that's about . The 17-35 is a relatively brand new lens, so there isn't much info out there on it. DXOmark isn't scheduled to test the lens until March. However, the Nikon 16-35mm at only $300 more is pretty tempting, considering the features, performance, and how much it will hold its value.</p>

<p>Thanks Ariel. The Nikon 16-35 f4, however has a lot of distortion. Distrotion cannot be corrected on film. I shoot film alot.</p>

<p>Must be new or recent, as I haven't heard much of it...and I love wide angles.</p>

<p>Mr. Rockwell has a favorable review of the lens. I don't think I can post a link to his site so you'll have to look it up.</p>

<p>I use the Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR lens on my D7000 and I think this lens is far superior to my prime 35mm f/1.8 DX lens, which was a favorite before I got the 16-35. The distortion at the 16 & 17 mm is nominal and not more than you see with any extreme wide angle lens. The VR on this lens allows me to handhold as slow as 1/8 second without blur. I don't understand how Nikon did that, because to me it is magic. In short, buy this lens. You will love it. The Tokina lens to get is the 11-17mm. The quality of this lens is like no other that Tokina makes. Together with the Nikon 16-35 f/4 VR, you've got all the wide angle you'll ever need.</p>

<p>I'm guilty of not reading Andre's post carefully enough to see that he found Rockwell's review already. But, he did also state that he'll be using it with film so Tokina's 11-16mm is not likely an option.</p>

<p>tokina also has a 16-28/2.8. might be worth looking into.</p>

<p><strong>"I have seen from web sample images that Tokina 17-35 f4 has amazing low distortion"</strong><br>

<strong> </strong><br>

Quite the contrary, I may say, from what I saw on this japanese website :<br>

<a href="http://www.kenko-tokina.co.jp/tokina/atx17-35.html#w02">http://www.kenko-tokina.co.jp/tokina/atx17-35.html#w02</a></p>

 

<p>I stand corrected. It's not listed at B&H, and I didn't see it on the Tokina web site, but Adorama does have it listed. Apologies to all.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em><strong>"I have seen from web sample images that Tokina 17-35 f4 has amazing low distortion"</strong></em><br /><em> <strong> </strong></em><br /><em> Quite the contrary, I may say, from what I saw on this japanese website :</em><br /><em> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.kenko-tokina.co.jp/tokina/atx17-35.html#w02" target="_blank">http://www.kenko-tokina.co.jp/tokina/atx17-35.html#w02</a>"</em></p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Which picture suggests distortion to you? We're talking about optical barrel / pincushion distortion, not perspective-based distortion.</p>

<p>True, but when I realised that , it was nothing I can do to change the post...</p>

I took a leap of faith on the len's optical

performance and picked up one (a

Tokina 17-35 f4 Nikon mount) today.

 

A new Nikon 17-35 f2.8 is $1800. The

Tokina was $720.

 

 

I couldn't justify the extra $1100 of the

Nikon for one more stop of light and

worse barrel distortion.

<p>Congrats'!. Perhaps you can share with us your first impressions...</p>