Reading mode: Light Dark

Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 user report???

Go to last post
I have juste received my new Tokina 16-50.
Bought it new on Ebay (shop in Germany) for € 455 (including shipping).

The lens looks wonderful. Il like the fact that it is sturdy and well built (comparable to the 12-24 or even better).
After my first pictures, I can see (when cropping 200%) some CA at 2.8.

For me, it is not an issue since I shoot in raw and process the files through DXO which shall automatically remove CA.

The pictures look sharp (even wide open) and I like the bokeh and the color rendition.

I will continue my investigations when the weather here in Belgium will be more sunny. Let's hope....
 
Glaudus said:
I have juste received my new Tokina 16-50.
Bought it new on Ebay (shop in Germany) for € 455 (including shipping).
The lens looks wonderful. Il like the fact that it is sturdy and well
built (comparable to the 12-24 or even better).
After my first pictures, I can see (when cropping 200%) some CA at 2.8.
For me, it is not an issue since I shoot in raw and process the files
through DXO which shall automatically remove CA.
The pictures look sharp (even wide open) and I like the bokeh and the
color rendition.

I will continue my investigations when the weather here in Belgium
will be more sunny. Let's hope....
Click to expand...
Hi Glaudus, could you please post some 100% crops from pictures straight from the camera?

Thanks
 
Something that I remarked tonight is that if you use the internal flash of the Nikon D80, you will often have the shadow of the lens on your pictures. I have the problem at 16 but also at 50mm. It seems that the lens is too large/long for the internal flash. I will try to use it with my SB-600
 
it seems a good lens ive been looking at it also

one thing though

i shoot snowboarding so does anyone know if it has nice quick focusing?

thanks !

kevx
 
If the 16-50 is anything like the 12-24 and 50-135, then it will be a winner for sure. I'm certainly considering it, since i find the other two lenses help me create crisp, clear images that work beautifully for my clients and for me. Much as I love my classic Nikkor 80-200, most of the time I now use the Tokina 50-135 unless I really need the extra reach. It's much smaller and lighter, and far less obtrusive.

Lee
 
Not as snappy as AF-S going from a larger focal length differential, say 50mm to 20mm, but otherwise plenty fast. Perhaps the 18-70 with AF-S might be a basis for comparison in the store if you can find both together. Or even the 17-55 AF-S.

It is quicker than the Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D that I like so much.

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron
 
One is on it's way from B&H to arrive later today. On the strength of the 10-17, 12-24 and 16-50 I decided to give it a spin for a wedding shoot in two weeks. I think it will fit in perfectly and if I need the extra reach I'll have the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR AF-S at hand.

I have been testing the IQ of each on images that I normally take but will subject them to a newspaper test shortly.



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/82807490/original

Tokina 10-17mm f/3.4-4.5 DX Fisheye
Nikon D200 1/320s f/8.0 at 13.0mm iso400



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/85170083/original

Tokina 12-24mm f/4 DX
Nikon D200 1/400s f/8.0 at 12.0mm iso200



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/84819561

Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 DX
Nikon D200 1/80s f/8.0 at 50.0mm iso400

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron
 
Glaudus said:
I have regretfully no idea on how to post pictures.
Could you please help me?
Click to expand...
Well if you don't have your own site to host your pictures, you could create a trial account on pbase.com or on flickr.com and upload there them and finally you only need to post the links to them (in the Help/Suggestions available when you post it's explained).
 
--
tommiejeep

Unfortunately you can no longer see my thread history but I have been trying to get into on the 16-50 and 50-135 for months. Nothing around. Now that there are copies in your hands please can you shoot at f2.8. there has never been any real question when the 16-50 is stopped down.
Cheers
 
Find the f/2.8 images taken from the day this lens arrived in my hands from B&H Photo posted here ...

http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/tokina_1650&page=all

Keep in mind these are first images taken in day-to-day activities. Most are from an afternoon hike up the original Natural Bridge trail in the Red River Gorge Geological Area, near Slade, KY about an hour's drive east of Lexington.

There are a couple of comparisons taken at different apertures, for example Natural Bridge in the third photo below is one such. Likewise the first three photos in this gallery. The last two were taken at night.

All were handheld with Nikon D200, developed from RAW with ACR, only a meidum contrast curve and 25 percent sharpening applied, downsized then saved to jpg with CS3. Otherwise all are as shot without further post processing. For accurate vieiwing please display as the original selection at the bottom of the photo. Also best results if your monitor is calibrated sRGB (Eye One Display 2).

I hope to post some newspaper lens tests later this week if time permits.



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/85273811/large
Nikon D200 1/80s f/2.8 at 50.0mm iso200



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/85273796/large
Nikon D200 1/125s f/2.8 at 16.0mm iso200



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/85273800/large
Nikon D200 1/60s f/2.8 at 16.0mm iso100

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron
 
How sharp do you find this lens to be wide open. I am considering this lens and the Nikkor 17-55 and have found this thread to be extremely helpful.

I have looked at the Tamron at my local store but have been put off by the build quality of that lens.

I own the Tokina 12-24 and have been very pleased with that lens. It does show a little CA but I usually shoot in RAW and Nikon Capture takes care of the CA.

Thanks,
David - an Atlanta Nikonian
 
Thanks for posting those samples. Colors and overall appearance looks pretty nice.

Would you be willing to post 100% crops of the originals (unprocessed in Photoshop)? It's pretty much pointless to try to judge sharpness on post-processed images that aren't at 100%. Unsharpened raw originals would be best.
 
I hopefully will be able to run a routine newspaper test on the 12-24mm, 16-50mm and 50-135mm later today (Monday) and post the results with my copies of these lenses. Of course, my findings, like those in photozone.de are only ancedotal as conclusive findings require an adequate sample size.

This photo indicates a sharp f/2.8 images ...



http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall/image/85273787/large
Nikon D200 1/750s f/2.8 at 50.0mm iso100

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron
 
I agree whole heartedly with these comments on the Tokina 16-50. I've had mine for about a month and though the 70-200 VR is on most of the time I have shot some with the Tokina an find it very nice indeed.

I really don't post or test, just use though I did post a few on the Nikonians. I did post the proverbial shot of the treetops against a bright blue sky and with the sun thrown in for good measure. Flair was nil and I sure couldn't find any of the dreaded, mentioned CA. There was some distortion at the wide end but nothing that isn't easily fixed. Also at the wide end, wide open there was a little vignetting, again very easily corrected.

My want lens is the 17-35 but at this time after upgrades in other areas that wasn't to be at this time. The 17-55DX isn't in the running. I don't have the patience for the time it takes to high-grade a decent Tamron and it wouldn't stand up to what it would need to anyway. The Sigs I believe have good glass but I have witnessed far too many going back to the factory for mechanical repairs.

In short, I rolled the dice on the Tokina and as far as I'm concerned came out way ahead at this time. It's doing what I want and the build quality and results are better than I hoped for.

So far it's been a nice complement to my AF-S 28-70 and 70-200VR.
--
Don
 
OK, good idea.

Let me explain a little. I had been planning to buy a Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 for an upcoming wedding shoot. I rented the Nikon last year and found I used it for approximately 90% of the wedding shots. I had it for a little over a week and used it only for that purpose. I have not really needed it again until now because I have an excellent Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 and a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. I actually prefer the Oly for day-to-day use due to the 2X crop factor giving me an effective 28-108mm lens.

However this changes with a wedding shoot. There for various reasons I prefer to use Nikon. Still, for the occasional wedding $1,200 is a tidy sum for one lens. And in fact I really am looking at x2 that amount as I'd like to have the 12-24mm in my bag as well. Before, I looked at the Tamy 17-50mm f/2.8 and the 28-75mm f/2.8 lens. While I like them I did not consider them on par with the Nikon. Today we have the Tokina offerings including the 10-17, 12-24, 16-50 and 50-135 as options with the latter two being f/2.8.

So, when it came time to purchase (or rent again) the Nikon I decided to take a hard look at Tokina. The photos posted so far reflect my intended end point for these lenses and will mostly be web images and modest prints for a wedding album. At this point I am well satisfied that they will accomplish this task with ease.

I agree that a more rigorous look is desirable. I hope to post tonight or in two nights' time 100% crops at various f/stops and focal lengths of all four lenses. I do not have a Nikon 17-55 (or Tamy 17-50mm) for comparison unfortunately. Of course I would be interested in an expanded comparison (or shoot out to also include the Sigma and even the Canon and Oly offerings). But perhaps we can build on what I can supply.

Thanks for the suggestion!

--
-jts
http://www.pbase.com/jtsmall
Canon, Nikon and Olympus
equipment in profile

'From the first moment I handled my lens with a tender ardour.' Julia Margaret Cameron
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top