Tokina 11-16 f/2.8

I've not used it but it's widely regarded as the best UWA lens on the market for crop cameras. Better than both Nikon and Canon offerings.
 
Maybe I had a bad one, but I found it very soft at f2.8.
 
f1charlie said:
Maybe I had a bad one, but I found it very soft at f2.8.
Click to expand...

I never really used mine at 2.8 though it's nice that I could given that none of the obvious alternative can offer that. At f/5.6 and f/8 it was one of the best lenses I've ever used.
 
i have a Tok 11-16 its permanantly on my 600D body, i find it super sharp, ...could'nt recommend it enough to be honest... i like to shoot Urbex interiors and lanscape stuff so i done some research for a good while before buying it! ... never looked back
 
i used to have one on my d300, it was one of the best lenses' i've owned.
 
I used one along with my D300. A cracking lens and better than the Nikon 12-24 IMO.
 
I own the 11-16 and the Canon 10-22. I keep them both because they're both the best option at different jobs. The Canon is for almost everything, the Tokina is for wide-field astro shots and nothing else.

The reason I don't use the Tokina for anything else is that it suffers horribly from flare. If the sun is anywhere near the edge of the frame then you're almost guaranteed ugly great blobs all over your image. The Canon, OTOH, is one of the most flare-resistant lenses on the planet. And with an UWA you're going to have the sun causing problems around 50% of the time if your outdoors and it's not cloudy (or night-time).

f2.8 is only needed for extremely low-light. Hence its retention for astro images. If I ever want to shoot indoors where flash isn't allowed I'll probably take it.

There is no difference in sharpness between the two. The Tokina does suffer from very lightly worse chromatic abberation. The Canon has a much better focal length range and it also has a closer MFD, which can be quite helpful.
 
Here's my oft-posted comparison between the two...

UWA%20FlareTest-2.jpg


UWA%20FlareTest-1.jpg


As a check on the sharpness I decided to look at a crop of these two images. I was wrong, they're not equally as sharp. The Canon is a lot sharper.

UWA%20Sharpness.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have this lens on my D7000, I have not used any other UWA but Im very satisfied with this lens and its incredibly sharp.
 
bobman said:
I have this lens on my D7000, I have not used any other UWA but Im very satisfied with this lens and its incredibly sharp.
Click to expand...

Same here.

Use it on a D7000 and its very, very good.

As others have said, it's better than the Nikon equivalent.

I find it very sharp, great stars around the light sources in a night photo!

I love mine.

Oh, and it's built like a bloody tank!!
Reeks of quality when you use it.

I use mine with a CPL filter quite a bit of automotive, landscape, snowboard stuff etc and if you are going to buy a CPL you need a thin frame one otherwise it won't work.

A Hoya Pro 1 Digital 77mm works perfect with the Tokina.
 
Ive got one excellent wide angle lens very sharp too:)
 
good comparisons Frank! ... not used mine much in sunny daylight situ's but i see your point, .. it does seem to come into its own at dusk or low light tho! .. so the f2.8 might have the edge there;)
 
oh and ...... your "gear list" is huge! ... hope you dont keep it all in that shed :suspect:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top