Views on Tokina 12-24 F4

S

smartplumber

Suspended / Banned
Messages
71
Name
Marcus
Edit My Images
No
Have sourced a Nikon 18-70 following advice on here and now looking at UW lenses.

What are your views on the Tok 12-24 F4 and any other suggestions?

Thanks
 
the one an only suggestion I could give is look at the tokina 11-16 f2.8

newer, better and 2.8

cant wait until I have the money and priority to get it :)
 
The Tokina 12-24mm F4 is an absolutely cracking lens.

I have had a Canon 17-40mm L, a Canon 10-22mm and in my experience the Tokina 12-24mm F4 beats them both hands down on image quality. I'm not the first person to say the 12-24mm beats the Canon 17-40 L either.

The lens is built like a tank to boot, proper industrial strength going on. AF is a bit on the slow side but definitly not sluggish. Manual focus is smooth as is zooming. Build quality is easily as good as the Canon L series.

I rate this lens very highly, I must be mad as I'm considering selling mine (Canon fit, sorry!)
 
I have the Mark 2 version and I am very pleased with it. The 11-16 F2.8 is supposedly a tad sharper and F2.8 as opposed to F4 butif you are using the lens for landscape and stopping down to F8-F11 then what does it matter?! I really like mine and wouldn't part with it. Over the 11-16 you lose the 1mm on the wide end but gain an extra 8mm on the long end, which is the reason I went for the 12-24.

There are samples on my flickr ...


buachaille etive mor edit copy topaz by SimonR_UK, on Flickr
 
The 12-24 is a great lens and about a third cheaper than the 11-16 if you buy used. The only down side is the CA which is BAD. You can fix it in post though and it is easier to fix in Nx view than Photoshop. If you are a nikon user IMHO The only better wa lens is the 12-24 f2.8 which I have just changed my tokina for. Most of the architectural images on my website were taken with the tokina and a D300.

www.andrewhatfield.co.uk
 
Yup it's a superb lens, definately one of the best of the super wide bunch. Not only does it have excellent IQ but it's built to last and outshines both the Sigma and Canon versions by a long shot. Consider the 11-16 if you plan to do a lot of low light shooting or or you really need that extra mm.

EDIT: Don't have any experience with Nikon WA lenses, however there are a couple I know that are apparently as good or better. Also I've never had any problems with CA on my lens, which I did find odd as it's "well known" on the lens. It's very rare that I get any, and in fact it out preformed most of my old lenses in that respect (canon Kit lens, Sigma 24-70. 75-300 IS), although my 300 f/4 used to be better at handling...
 
Last edited:
The quick answer is I have used them all for various brands and think the Tokina 11-16 is the best.

The 12-24 is a great lens but I like having f2.8 on all my lenses (or as fast as I can get) as I am in the camp that thinks it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it:lol: (and I do need it now and again)
Personal preference for that one and of course budget often plays a part.

Either choice is great.
 
it's built to last and outshines both the Sigma and Canon versions by a long shot
Click to expand...

ERM...... could you expand a little on this please Amp34? In what way does it outshine my siggy 10-20? are you calling my siggy 10-20 inferior?...:bat:
 
The edge/corner sharpness isn't brilliant and its a bit soft wide open and at bigger apertures. However built very well and when stopped down its very sharp indeed. :thumbs:

For my type of photography there are limited opportunities to use it and I generally prefer the images from my Nikon 18-70. :shrug:
 
bomberman said:
ERM...... could you expand a little on this please Amp34? In what way does it outshine my siggy 10-20? are you calling my siggy 10-20 inferior?...:bat:
Click to expand...

You love that thing almost as much as I did ;)

I'd also like to know which Canon lens he is comparing it to as well.
 
bomberman said:
ERM...... could you expand a little on this please Amp34? In what way does it outshine my siggy 10-20? are you calling my siggy 10-20 inferior?...:bat:
Click to expand...

The build quality is second to none against the Canon and Sigma, simple.:lol:

The Canon is quite plasticky, the Sigma just doesn't have "it" (same build style as my old 24-70 too) whereas the 12-24 feels like you could bash it against the floor and it would keep going. It's smooth in use and doesn't have any extrenous bits.
 
Canon what? They don't make a 12-24.
 
I had one for a short period and found it great, get one bought. I sold it for £250.. so they are cheaper than the Tokina f/2.8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top