Tokina RMC 28mm 2.8 quality?

Hey All,

 

Just wondering if you had experience with this Tokina RMC 28mm 2.8

MF lens? I know the latest SL model which is MF too received a 3.4

grade photodo.com. Any ideas? :)

I'd say that the Tokina is pretty good for a 3rd party lens. It's not quite as sharp as my Zuiko 28mm f2.8, or my 25mm f4 Voigtlander Skopar, but it's in the same class as the Nikon, Canon, and Minolta OEM 28mm lenses that I've used (not counting exotic aspherical lenses). The only other 3rd Party 28mm lenses that I've had that are comparable in quality are an Old, bulky Vivitar 28mm f2.5, and a Kiron 28mm f2, and similar Vivitar Series 1 f1.9. (All of these lenses were actually made by Kiron, who made most Vivitar lenses of that era). If you can find it in the right (i.e. modern enough) mount, the Vivitar 28mm f2.5 shows up on ebay alot and usually sells for $25-40 and it's a screaming bargain at that price).

 

BTW, 28mm is my favorite focal length by far, so I have experience with tons of 28mm lenses. The best I've owned is the Olympus Zuiko 28mm f2.8 and the best I've ever seen are the Leica 28mm Elmarit-M and Minolta 28mm Rokkor-M, both made for Leica Rangefinder mounts, with shorter back focus (the 25mm Voitlander Skopar is similar in that regard)

Thanks Doug, like in my previous post with the "fungus amungus" pentax lens, I'm looking to pick up one for a friend who's on a budget and I have no experience with Tokina lenses and information is sparse as to the quality of the older models like this RMC one. And generally (I stress that) third party lens, especially Sigma, don't seem to stand up to close scrutiny although I am happy with my Tamron XR for its convenience...but i guess for primes, one would be looking for that extra quality and resolution that zooms fail to provide and that is exactly what I'm looking for on behalf of a friend.

Darryl, what mount do you need it in? I have a pre-AI Nikon version of the Vivitar 28mm f2.5 that I home-AI converted, and it works great. I'd sell it quite cheap, because I have the Kiron 28mm f2 and the Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AI as well. It's a big heavy lens but it has outstanding build quality for a 3rd party lens.

Hey Doug,

 

Sounds like you got good stuff, I'm actually looking for a 28mm K-mount for my friend's Pentax and I'm based in Australia. I would have taken up your offer on the Nikon AIS if I hadn't already have my own Nikkor 28mm AF-D. Thanks!

Darryl, IIRC when Tokina was making "RMC" lenses they had two lines, and the "RMC" was the less expensive less good of the two. Is your inquiry just for interest, or are you seriously contemplating getting one?

Hi Dan,

 

I'm considering picking one up but might be having second thoughts about the quality now...Maybe I'll stick to the normal but more expensive name brands for security and peace of mind

Hello,

 

the Tokina SL 28mm performs quite well and it´s a good lens. Stopped down you will not see any difference to *brand" lens.

 

I am collecting issues of german (ColorFoto and Fotomagazin) and american (Popphoto) photo magazines of the last 30 years and so I am able to compare the test results - so I can tell you one thing:

 

Prime lenses will beat every zoom lens in optical performance, except it´s an expensive pro-level zoom.

 

Yes, older primes are vulnerable to flare a.s.o - but then you have to use a lens hood. What´s the problem?

 

I got my Tokina SL 28mm for 43 Dollar (inclusive shipping) in new condition and I am quite happy with the results.

 

The older Tokina RMC are not so good, but the Tokina SL is very good in price and performance.

 

 

regards

 

Aykman

<p>Ancient thread, but I recently bought one of these lenses, and this was the first thing that Google gave me. It was in the Contax/Yashica mount, with RMC Tokina 28mm 1:2.8 @52 81104486 written around the edge. I have mounted it on a full-frame Canon body with an adapter. I wanted something smaller and easier to carry around than a large zoom lens. My subjective opinion is that, at f/8, it is sharp in the middle and remains good until the very edge, at which point it becomes blurry and soft, but not offensively so.<br>

Here's an example I shot an hour or so ago with a full-frame body at f/8 and turned into black and white, using Photoshop's default level of 25 for sharpening:<br>

<img src="http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/558/img5097.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Here's a full-sized crop of the houses in the middle:<br>

<img src="http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/9145/img5097houses.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Unfortunately that image is useless for showing you how the lens performs at the edge. Here's a shot taken further up the hill, in direct sunlight, cropped from roughly one-eight of the image width in from the edge, also at f/8:<br>

<img src="http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/6185/img5097edge.jpg" alt="" /><br>

I paid an absolute pittance, less than £20. I suspect on a cropped digital body it would be a decent 50mm substitute at f/4 and f/5.6. My subjective impression is that at f/2.8 it is still sharp in the middle, but the outer corners as above become a kind of blur, and the contrast goes to pot. Overall I felt that distortion was not objectionable, and I did not notice any colour aberrations, but I have not taken many photographs with the lens in an environment that would produce them. I admit that the only other prime lens I have ever used in this range was an old M42 Pentacon 29mm f/2.8, which was mindboggling awful.</p>

<p>Just to clarify, the final image contains the extreme bottom-left corner, and is cropped inwards from that point until about an eighth into the width of the image. I.e. it's not a rectangular crop one-eighth of the image width from the extreme corner. As you can see, on a small-former digital SLR it would be pretty good at f/8, although redundant given that modern kit lenses are also pretty good at f/8.</p>

<p>I have the K mount version of the RMC Tokina 28 2.8, and from what I can tell, it's not a bad lens at all. Here is an example from it on my K110D, and a few on my K10D</p>

<p>K110D<br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/1795324700_9fa12f446c_o.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="639" /></p>

<p>K10D <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2303/2131766812_285e804511_o.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="685" /></p>

<p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/2130990199_a08eed89f2_o.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="685" /></p>

<p>This thread is old but I would like to chime in. I just bought a brand new Tokina 28mm F2.8 SL lens (Contax Yashica mount). I used an adapter and tested it on my Canon 5D Mark II against my Canon 16-35mm F2.8II. (tripod, shutter release cable, 10x liveview manual focus, wall chart)<br>

Canon has better corner sharpness at all tested apertures (2.8, 4, 5.6, 8). Center sharpness is about the same at 2.8 and 4. At 5.6 Tokina is slightly sharper. At 8 Tokina is sharper than Canon at the center.<br>

Canon has a lot more distortion at the corner. Overall I would sayTokina is better than Canon optically, due to Canon's egregious distortion at the corners.</p>

<p>Okay, one more piece to add. My Tokina RL version is very susceptible to flare compared to modern lenses. Make sure you use a proper 49mm lens hood (that is designed for 28mm lens, or it will leave dark corners) or use you free hand while shooting into bright light sources.</p>