tokina

B

blackcavier

Suspended / Banned
Messages
34
Name
charlie
Edit My Images
Yes
hi ,can anyone advise on a Tokina 11-16mm ,im new to photography with a low budget and a new Nikon d3200 I like the idea of doing landscapes,what are your views? any advice on any lens you think might be better, used or otherwise, thank you, charlie
 
you could also consider the Sigma 10-20mm a cracking lens for Landscapes

I own one and wouldnt be with out it to be honest


Les :thumbs:

ps welcome to the forum
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tokina dxii kicks the sigma out the water, iv had both and got rid if the sigma due to ghosting, flairing and its not that sharp until stopped down. The tokina is sharp and renders colours well.

I would buy the dxii over the sigma
 
The 11-16/2.8 is a very good lens. It has strong areas (sharpness, aperture) as well as weaknesses (flare, corner performance wide open, CA). But it general I think it is a decent performer.

Just make sure to get version II as the original version doesn't focus on motorless bodies. However, even manual focusing is not a big deal. I actually prefer to have more control on DOF a focus on hyperfocal distances when shooting wide.
 
thank you all for your replies, looks like the tokina 11-16mm or the sigma 10-20mm,but got a preference for the tokina after reading reviews, so now to find one at the best price, thanks everyone,
 
there is also the Sigma 8-16 HSM.
Goes quite a bit wider than the Tokina but doesn't have the f2.8 (how often does that get used for landscape though?).
 
You could also have a look at the Tokina 12-24 f4 pro as well as I had one as well as the Siggie 10-20 and to be honest I much preferred the Tokina...
 
Another vote for the 11-16 pro. (built like a tank, too)
 
Trig's said:
You could also have a look at the Tokina 12-24 f4...
Click to expand...

I have the old version of that, it is excellent - I hired the Nikon 12-24 to compare, but for my uses I couldn't justify the slight increase in quality for the large difference in price.
 
once again thanks, now im not sure what one to go for, lol, the 12-24 or the 11-16, maybe a bit better, or not,, with a bit of extra zoom with the 12-24 ? any views on that please, and i'm not in any rush at all to buy one,just to get as much advice before I spend my money, thank you,
 
thank you for all your replies, now i'm not sure what lens to go for, lol the 12-24 or 11-16, maybe with the 12-24 a bit more zoom? im just trying to get as much advice before I spend my money, lol thank you,
 
My choice would be either 11-16 or 10-20. Every millimetre makes a difference on short end. If I want to compose an ultra-wide picture I usually want to be as wide as possible.

I had 11-16 and I always used 11mm.
 
thanks mpe i'll stick with the 11-16, all the replies greatly appreciated,
 
I'm thinking about buying the Tokina 11-16 too, have been looking at several reviews, and will probably take the plunge with either digital rev or Onestop Digital. Here's a (slightly annoying) video review:

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/tokina-11-16mm-f-2/NDYyMjMwOTA_A

This review talks a lot about Nikon, and this being good news for Nikon users. I don't understand why? Is there any difference between that and the Canon mount?
 
heidfirst said:
there is also the Sigma 8-16 HSM.
Goes quite a bit wider than the Tokina but doesn't have the f2.8 (how often does that get used for landscape though?).
Click to expand...

Tempting, but apparently you can't add any filters to this lens, is that true?
 
have tokina 11-16 myself. superb glass. superb build. superb image quality. just because of that lens i did many research online. so ended buying more tokina stuff :)

Have Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro & Tokina 50-135mm f2.8 which both them awesome.
 
well some great replies thank you, now you mention filters being new to this, why would you use filters and where? can you point me to see some samples with filters,
 
For the Tokina 11-16/2.8 I would consider:
  • ND filter - This is probably the filter I would use most. Very handy filter for increasing exposure time, to blur the water in coastal landscapes, waterfalls, etc., Also great to be able to use fast lenses wide open on sunny days and to reduce shutter time to enable sync with flash.
  • Polarizer filter - they work well for landscapes, but they could be tricky on ultrawide lenses if the sky is in the frame. I rather prevent using them on ultra-wide lenses.
  • UV/Protectors - I never use these
  • Graduated filters - Cokin or Lee systems. I have used them in the past. But modern cameras D4/D800/D600/D7100 have much better dynamic range and the difference compared to older cameras almost matches the effect of graduated filters which is amazing. I could live without them.
 
I've just ordered the Tokina, and would also echo what MPE said about the ND filter, very useful. I had an ultra-wide Canon a long time ago which broke, and I can remember the extremely dark edges from using a polariser at the shortest focal length. I've since acquired a 9-stop ND filter and some ND Grads, so looking forward to using these in landscapes again, although I don't understand the reference to using slim filters only - what difference does it make, and how do I know if my current filters are "slim"?
 
Slim filters have thinner frame. This somewhat reduces the dark corner issue you mentioned. Standard filters can vignette on ultrawide lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top