photo_angle Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Another non-techie person seeking advice�.. I�ve been happily using prime lenses shooting nature. However, now I find it difficult to do journalist work with them. I have narrowed my choice to 2 Tokina lenses. Now I�m lost. � 28-70mm f/2.8 ATX Pro-SV $279 � 28-80mm f/2.8 AT-X 280AF $500 after rebateSo I�m wondering: besides the last 10mm, is there any other significant difference? Sharpness? I find people have different standards on �soft� images. So if you recommend one lens vs. the other, a photo to show the quality difference will be great! (For camera bodies, I have Nikon F100 & D100. ) Much appreciated, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_t Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 I would recommend the 28-70 AFS 2.8 Nikon. I know it wasn't one of the choices but its still my recommendation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_t Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Seriously you already have approximately $2500 USD invested in cameras, why skimp now with third party glass?? Search the archives and make your best decision. I realize you probably don't have unlimited funds and the 28-70AFS is expensive but I don't think you will get the best out of your D100 with third party glass. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick smith Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 I would save up and spend the money on either the aforementioned 28-70 AF-s or the 17-35 AF-s. Both of those seem to be pretty solid photojournalism choices. If it has to be one of those two, go with the 28-80. You never know when 10mm more focal length will be helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photo_angle Posted March 23, 2004 Author Share Posted March 23, 2004 Guess I'm driving myself crazy by adding more options..... Any option on this one? I like shallow depth of field. So sharpness at low aperture is very important to me. Thanks, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hugh_t Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 I think the AFS Nikon will be the sharpest at all f sops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_n._wall Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Sometimes the ridiculous prices Nikon charges for some Nikkors forces one to do the unspeakable (to some) deed and buy a non-Nikkor lens. I cannot imagine putting the money down that Nikon wants for the 28-70 AF-S zoom -- the price is ridiculous (as far as I am concerned) unless I were a pro and could make money with this lens. I own the Tokina 28-80 f/2.8 and find it splendid. It is certainly comparable to a Nikkor product in terms of robustness of build and quality of image. I would not hesitate to subject any image I made with this lens to the most rigorous critical examination, in one-to-one comparison with images made with the Nikkors. I have won prizes with images made with this lens. Not clear why Tokina sells two f/2.8 zooms at this focal length. There is a rumor that the 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 is a copy of a lens design by a now-defunct company called Angeneux which was supposed to be legindary in its day -- maybe that's why Tokina keeps putting it out. I also know that the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 has been very well reviewed and is certainly worth a look. If you search archives and around the WWW on review sites you will find lots of discussions of all these lenses. The obvious Nikkor alternative among affordable zooms is the 35-70 f/2.8 zoom, which may or may not still be made, but clean used ones ought to be available from KEH. This lens is tack-sharp but you have to like push-pull zooms (which I don't) to enjoy using this lens. The other alternative is to remember that 28-70/80 is not all that much of a zoom range, so if you put down $85 you can get a lightning-fast tack-sharp 50 mm f/1.8 prime lens and zoom with your feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_chan3 Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I owned the Tokina 28-70/2.6-2.8 - it was a decent lens from f5.6 and up. However, wide open, it left a lot to be desired. If you're interested in shallow DOF, you'll probably be disappointed with this lens (especially at 28mm). I know I was. I sold it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roto Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 I beg to differ with John: I have a Tokina 28-80/2.8 AT-X PRO and, although extremely well built, optically it is quite disappointing. Pretty much unusable wide open (corner sharpness is so bad that you can see in the viewfinder the lens is soft). Corner sharpness climbs to acceptable levels at about f/5.6, by which time you ask yourself why you paid for (and carry) the additional two stops. I went to the Swiss Tokina distributor (I live in Zurich) and tried a couple of other 20-80s. I haven't got a lemon: they are all so bad. Wide open it's definitely and by far the worst lens I own. The only positive thing I can say is that it recovers pretty well when closed down a couple of stops. Good for landscapes, if you like weight lifting. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_n._wall Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Roberto, based on my personal experience with the 28-80, confirmed by a number of reputable reviewers, I stick with my original claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roto Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Suits you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now