Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 vs. something

[acute]

<p>I use the Tokina 11-16 on a DX body and I find it very useful. Here is a shot at 11mm taken with it on a very hot super bright day right around noon.</p><div></div>

[keith_anderson7]

<p>The Tokina is a better lens in just about every aspect. In fact, I sold my 10-20 Sigma to buy the 11-16 Tokina and have been very happy with the upgrade. I didn't read every post, but to say the least, Tokina has a better build quality, faster glass, better for use indoors or with a flash, better image quality. The only reason NOT to like the Tokina is the more limited zoom range (although I usually use them both between 10-15 so the Tokina only loses 1mm in my sweet spot) and the focusing distance. I could care less about those things. To me you'd be silly to buy the Sigma unless the money is the decider (last time I checked the Sigma was cheaper).</p>

[bill_harmatuk]

<p>I have had the 11-16 Tokina for about a year now. It takes awsome interior shots of houses with no flash. Aperture priority only. <br>

Love the lens. Use it 75% of the time as a Realtor.</p>

[bill_harmatuk]

<p>I have had the 11-16 Tokina for about a year now. It takes awsome interior shots of houses with no flash. Aperture priority only. <br>

Love the lens. Use it 75% of the time as a Realtor.</p>

[bill_harmatuk]

<p>I have had the 11-16 Tokina for about a year now. It takes awsome interior shots of houses with no flash. Aperture priority only. <br /> Love the lens. Use it 75% of the time as a Realtor.</p>

<p>Sorry...... My first post.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>As a Realtor, I would get the 11-16mm as well. No question about it. But for normal shooting? Maybe not...</p>

<p>Thanks Eric, I like the train shot. Must be a lovely time in the Bay area now...</p>

[Two23]

<p>I shoot a D300 and love ultrawide. I bought the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. It's more versatile because it can shoot in lower light levels. When I eventually buy FX, I will sell it and buy 14-24mm f2.8.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[marypar4]

<p>Leslie,<br>

Need vs want..wow we could start a whole new thread on that one. Certainly a wide angle gives a whole new perspective to images. All you have to do is look on flickr..search sigma 10-20 to see . Diffferent strokes for different folks..I like the affect of the wide angle..you may never find a use for this lens which is a personal preference. I like extremes..long teles,macro and wide angles...you may prefer mid range 17-40 or whatever. Pototoes patatoes.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Mary---</p>

<p>Yeahhh, it's all about preference...I'm sure there are people out there that like popcorn for breakfast or oatmeal for dessert:)</p>

 

[chris_ciotti]

<p>I rented the Tokina 11-16mm for a trip to Utah recently and I loved it. I'm planning on picking one up this summer (if I can find one). It's just an amazing lens.</p>

<p> </p>

[chris_ciotti]

<p>I rented the Tokina 11-16mm for a trip to Utah recently and I loved it. I'm planning on picking one up this summer (if I can find one). It's just an amazing lens.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photoblog.com/cciotti/2010/05/12/untitled.html"><img src="http://i4.photoblog.com/photos/109620-1273749254-0.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br>

Bryce Canyon (11mm) <br>

<br /> <a href="http://www.photoblog.com/cciotti/2010/05/04/lower-emerald-pools.html"><img src="http://i4.photoblog.com/photos/109620-1273055965-0.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br>

Zion (16mm)</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>According to photozone.de, the 11-16/2.8 has pretty bad CA, but of course that only happens with high contrast subjects. And cameras like the D700 can eliminate it.</p>

<p>http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/379-tokina_1116_28_canon?start=1</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The characteristic is quite uniform across the range with an average pixel width at around 1.5-1.9px at the image borders. This is better compared to its in-house cousin but still not great. A quite typical flaw in many Tokina lenses actually.</p>

</blockquote>

[andy a.]

<p>I purchased the 11-16 specifically for f/2.8. I actually sold my tokina 12-24 (that I was very happy with) to fund it. This was back when I was DX only however, and really needed that extra stop for event photography.</p>

<p>Nowadays, I shoot almost exclusively FX, but the 11-16 still gets some use. As others have said, it's not bad at 15-16mm, but it's true that a dedicated FX lens is probably going to deliver better performance. However, more often than not, I shoot it wider and crop off the edges (e.g. 4x5). Shot at 11mm and cropping square provides some interesting results for sure, and it gives me that nostalgic 6x6 medium format feeling. You can't achieve that particular look, even with the much more pricey 14-24 (which I will probably eventually upgrade to). Just some food for thought...</p>

[carl_becker2]

<p>I have used and liked the Sigma 10-20mm f5.6, Tokina 12-24mm f4 and Tokina 11-16mm. The Nikkor 12-24mm f4 reads well also. IMHO you should decide which lens meets your needs best a purchase it. Renting one is a great way to evaluate. For me the Tokina 12-24mm would make the most sense YMMV. </p>

[tcrowe]

<p>I have been a photographer, wince, since, I bought my first Nikon FTn in 1969. I also bought 4 Nikkor lenses, at that time, from 300mm to 28mm. I have taken a few shots here and there and worked professionally, now retired, for 27 years.<br>

I see a lot of cons about weight, ever done astro photography? The weight is due to the lens barrel, for a start and the number of elements and, to a lesser degree, the coatings on the glass although this is minor as to weight.<br>

The Tokina is a specialized lens. Yes, I have one. It is heavy. That's why I have tripods. I am fast with tripods. Comes with the territory.<br>

It is not the weight, that must be dealt with with any pro lens, depending on the glass. 13 elements presents weight. It is the method of steadying the glass in the lens. If I need a high camera angle, out of reach of my tripods, I use a ladder and a bean bag. The bean bag merely cradles the camera and lens to keep it still for the shot. Works great for those who are not familiar with this simple fix.<br>

The 11-16 is one of the best values you will ever see in pro glass. It is a great lens and should be in every ones bag.</p>