Discussion in 'Digital Cameras & Equipment' started by mPower, Apr 1, 2008.
I just read this, too. I rented the Tokina 12-24 last year and was very impressed with the workmanship and feel of that lens. This one sounds like it is built just as well and gives even more of a wide angle. Not worried about it reaching beyond 16mm as I would only use this as wide as it could get. I hardly every took the 12-24 off the 12mm end.
Thought Ken did a good job with this review.
It's on my wish list...if the price comes in as rumored, it's going to be hard to get at first.
Is this a lens for full-frame cameras?
Ray: No; it's usuable, but with severe vignetting at 11-15, 16 doesn't show any.
Scott: I'm renting the 12-24 right now; mostly got it for my flight on 909 Saturday since 27mm equiv won't be wide enough.
Well, since I don't have a full-frame camera, this might be an option for me. I'm curious what the price is going to be and what pictures at WDW look like at the widest angle
Can't wait to see what you come back with. The pictures I got were amazing but couldn't justify the cost since I had the 18-200VR. I was eyeing the Sigma 10-20 but then Tokina announced the 11-16 lens. After using the 12-24, I know the 11-16 is going to be an excellent lens and Ken confirmed that. I think that's the first real review of it.
Scott, what is the rumored price of this lens. I need a good wide-angle since my 18-135 doesn't always cut it
Right now HK has it listed one place for $825. Probably something about the value of the dollar.
http://www.digitalrev.com/en/product_de ... tegory_id=
Odds are it will be between $600 and $700 at the major NYC stores. But I could be wrong.
This is a good looking lens. It really has me baffled. I really, really want to invest in the Nikon 14-24 2.8. I have it in my mind that I will be getting a full frame camera when the nikon prosumer comes out.
I also am somewhat of a lens snob. I just cant get it out of my mind that even a cheap nikon lens is better than a third party lens. In my early twenties, I could not afford nikon glass, so I bought various third party lens which always failed me. Finally thanks to ebay I sold off all that junk, and bought one nikon 28-200 lens that I then used up until November 2006 when I went digital!
Also, I now have mixed feelings about Ken Rockwell. I always enjoyed his reviews, and I knew to read them as part entertainment. But, his glowing recommendation to go check out that idiot that microwaves, floods, and drops his d3 just made me doubt Ken Rockwell.
Ok, back to the lens. It baffles me because 14 isnt that wide on my d80. so do I invest in a lens like this tokina, and get to use it lots until I get a full frame, or do I just invest in one of nikons best widest lens ready for my full frame?
Ray, Roger's in the ball park. The Tokina 12-24 is going for around $460 new at Amazon. I live in NY so I don't use B&H due to sales tax.
Craig, I agree, most third party lenses I've owned were nowhere near the quality of the camera manufacturer's. However, I would make an exception in these Tokina wide angles, having used one for a few days, I have no qualms about recommending them.
As for Ken, I think he still thinks he's a college kid at heart. You can bet, HE would never abuse his equipment like that but watches with glee to those who do. Can't fault his enthusiasm for his profession.
Being a lens snob is understandable. With Canon I mostly was, but I did have a Tokina 80-200/2.8 that was a great lens...until it succumbed to fungus. Since then it's been name brand most of the way - I wish Tokina was still making more lenses - they used to make a great 24-70/2.8, and I had my eye on a Canon model of that 3 years ago, but the small local shop was pricing it the same as new from NY, so I hesitated to buy it, and ended up not getting anything before I moved to Texas.
But for some reason being a new convert, switching back to Nikon I haven't felt the same. Probably because I spent soo much time looking at Sony, where you almost have no choice to look at third-party or else pay through the nose for the pro-level lenses.
FWIW, one of the Yen/Dollar conversions I saw today while poking around listed a price slightly under $600. If that is the case, the 12-24 is all but dead.
Interesting take on the Cali kid that did all the fun things to his D3. I'm glad he posted the Youtube videos. I probably would have never seen them, and its good to know that should you drop your gear while leaning over a rail (doing things you shouldn't in the first place) that chances are, it will survive. While I will not defend the kid from the 'spoiled brat' editorials, kudos to someone for doing it! If it had been Nikon, it would have carried little to no weight.
Or, a good time to get yourself a Tokina 12-24 on the used market. If you don't have a DX lens that's wider than 24, it's still a great lens. I got a review of it somewhere around here. Ah, here it is...Tokina 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro DX AF Wide Angle Lens Review The extra 1mm could be conpensated for with one's feet.
No doubt about the change in FOV, it really isn't worth mentioning between 11 and 12mm. For me, it's the fact that it is a 2.8 instead of a 4! One more reason not to have to cary a tripod for dusk/night time shots.
It's available for pre-order from Adorama ($570 for a late June 08 Delivery):
I second the motion about using third-party lens but the Tokina 11-16mm has not disappointed me one bit. It's a fantastic lens.
Thanks to Ken Rockwell, I switched to Nikon 3 years ago without a hitch ~ starting with the D70s. Since the days when I had owned countless Minolta cameras, I always dreamt owning a Nikon. Last week, I bought the D300 and a fleet of lens and I often check back at Ken's site for updates. He does excellent reviews.
Good to hear Dreamery. Welcome to the boards!
Welcome aboard Dreamery.
It is good to hear you like the Tokina 11-16 2.8. This is a very interesting lens to me as it would allow me to not spend big $ on a full frame and still get a fast ultrawide.
Separate names with a comma.