Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8

Is anyone using anything from Tokina, specifically the 11-16mm f/2.8. I chose this lens based on the reviews I had read and the fact that I wasn't ready to pay for the CanonEF 10-22 or any of the wide angle L lenses at that time. I have been more than happy with this lens...it has a very solid build andseems to be extremely sharp (especially between f/4 and f/16). I don't however, have anything to base these claims against, and was wondering if anyone else has used this lens. Any feedback would be great. Thanks.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/IMG_5F00_8894.JPG[/img]


Lake Louise, Alberta, Canada 11-16mm, f/2.8 on Canon 40D at 12mm, f/13, 1/640,ISO 400





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/IMG_5F00_6522.JPG[/img]


Honolulu Convention Center, Oahu, HI11-16mm, f/2.8 on Canon 40D at 11mm, f/10, 1/320, ISO 400

Wow, the colors are amazing... is that a good CPL filter, PP, or just hell great lens (or any combination of those)?

It was a standard UV filter on both...only very slight touches to thecontrast in PP. From what I have read, and my personal experience, this lens is better than its Tamron and Sigma equivalents...and perhaps as good as the Canon 10-22. I am looking to upgrade my glass in general, and as with most people, need to prioritize. I have been more than happy with this lens and was trying to to find out where I should place a wide-angle lens - zoom or prime - in my list of priorities. I just don't think too many people have this lens, or have used this lens, to compare it with.

if your happy with itwhats to comment on ....i would however suggest a little fill flash to do the photo of the lake some justice as for my tatste it is a little to dark ... i live in lake louise its an awesome place





cheers

Mark, I agree...Lake Louise was probably not the best choice as I don't think any of my equipment, and certainly not my talent, can really do Lake Louise justice. This one is a little brighter, while still showing off the sharpness of this lens. The distortion is a little rough at 11mm but I think it's worth the trade...


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.58/Sheraton-Niagra-Falls_5F00_102508.jpg[/img]


The Seraton Niagra; Canon 40D w/ Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 at 11mm, f/13, 1/640, ISO 400


Let me know what you think...

I think that the building looks odd and I'm not (or at least I think I'm not) talking about the distortion. Also, the whole picture is a bit underexposed, but that's noting you can't fix using your favorite PP software in a snap.


Oh and I really like the sky (PP?).

Ohh and look at the upper right corner, is that dust on your sensor? [:P]

This shot was taken after I was on the Maid of the Mist, so fortunately that is just a water spot on my lens filter...thought I had got all of them. [:$]


Thanks for the comments

I love the picture of Lake Louise. Amazing.


The other pictures have a tendency to 'fall backward' because of the angle, which is distracting.


But that first one: wow. Nice!

I've been doing quiet a bit of research on this lens, heard onlygood thingsabout it. It's going to be the next lens I purchase. I was going to get it last month but a 100-400 took it's place.

But Sean of another thread commented negatively...


http://community.the-digital-picture.com/forums/t/1691.aspx?PageIndex=1


What makes such a discrepancy??

I don't know. I wish the Tokina would have performed well. It's built like a tank, and I liked the constant f/2.8 aperture. However, if it won't focus correctly, it's useless to me. There's a possibility that the lens doesn't play well with the 50D (practically the newest camera at the time). They might have even corrected the issue by now. All I Know is that two separate copies performed terribly in my hands. After returning the second Tokina, I purchased the Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5. It's worked flawlessly and given me images I absolutely love.



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2658/...c8a7242920.jpg