Nikon Vs. Tokina 80-200 My results

My Nikkor 80-200 f2.8d AF ED just arrived from B&H today and I wasted no time in checking it out against my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 ATX Pro. Here are the results at 200mm f2.8. No post processing. Please ignore the exposure differences, the sun was out, then not, quite frequently. Placed on a tripod, Autofocus (AF-S mode) Dynamic off, CSP disabled, 6MP (3024) ISO 200. These are actual pixel crops (100%). Please see the link at the end if you want to see the results at f4.0 and to view the full image to give you an idea of the zoom. STD color STD tone, STD sharpening. Tripod mounted.

Here is the Nikkor at 200 f2.8:



and the Tokina at 200 f2.8:



It is quite evident either the Tokina is a bad sample, or just not a good lens vs. the Nikon, but what do you think of the sharpness of the Nikkor, noting that this is a full pixel view? With shapening of about 200/1 (or 2) 0, it comes out quite sharp. Does a 1 or 2 pixel radius seem a bit much to get a sharp image?

I think this Nikkor is going to work out. Also, this same SN Tokina lens behaved the same way on a different S2 body as well.

Here is the link to the rest of the test pics:

http://www.pbase.com/cj_michigan/tokina_vs_nikkon_80-200

Not much to look at I know, but here in Michigan it's around 20 degrees out right now, and there really isn't much to shoot at around here (at least from inside).

Sorry chris,
next time try to make both lenses focus on the same subject.

I expect your tokina not to be so much worse than the nikon, when properly focused.
regards,
dg
---
davide gazzotti
projects: http://www.davidegazzotti.com
works: http://www.davidephoto.com

Indeed. And if the exposure is different, then the MTF will be well off too. This comparison is hopelessly meaningless. Guess, the focus mark was probably on the top focus square, not the centre. Also, there's no contrast delta for the AF system to work on.

Excal

davide gazzotti said:

Sorry chris,
next time try to make both lenses focus on the same subject.
I expect your tokina not to be so much worse than the nikon, when
properly focused.
regards,
dg
---
davide gazzotti
projects: http://www.davidegazzotti.com
works: http://www.davidephoto.com

Click to expand...

--
Excal

Hi

seems to me that you are off focus with the Tokina. A really sharp lens is the SIgma 100-300/4, even sharper then the Nikkor 80-200/2.8 at aperture 4!

Regards
Johan
http://www.motljus.com

Chris G said:

My Nikkor 80-200 f2.8d AF ED just arrived from B&H today and I
wasted no time in checking it out against my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 ATX
Pro. Here are the results at 200mm f2.8. No post processing. Please
ignore the exposure differences, the sun was out, then not, quite
frequently. Placed on a tripod, Autofocus (AF-S mode) Dynamic off,
CSP disabled, 6MP (3024) ISO 200. These are actual pixel crops
(100%). Please see the link at the end if you want to see the
results at f4.0 and to view the full image to give you an idea of
the zoom. STD color STD tone, STD sharpening. Tripod mounted.

Here is the Nikkor at 200 f2.8:



and the Tokina at 200 f2.8:



It is quite evident either the Tokina is a bad sample, or just not
a good lens vs. the Nikon, but what do you think of the sharpness
of the Nikkor, noting that this is a full pixel view? With
shapening of about 200/1 (or 2) 0, it comes out quite sharp. Does a
1 or 2 pixel radius seem a bit much to get a sharp image?

I think this Nikkor is going to work out. Also, this same SN Tokina
lens behaved the same way on a different S2 body as well.

Here is the link to the rest of the test pics:

http://www.pbase.com/cj_michigan/tokina_vs_nikkon_80-200

Not much to look at I know, but here in Michigan it's around 20
degrees out right now, and there really isn't much to shoot at
around here (at least from inside).

Click to expand...

--
Regards
Johan
http://www.motljus.com

Hi Chris,
Nice lens and it seems to focus well compared to the Tokina.

To be fair, the Tokina seems to be focussed at a different distance, witness the branches around the bird house.
Maybe the lens is not that bad but the focus motor may not do the right job.
I use 500/0.3/0 or 350/0.4/0 sharpening but many combinations work well.
Rinus of Calgary

JohanP said:

Hi
seems to me that you are off focus with the Tokina. A really sharp
lens is the SIgma 100-300/4, even sharper then the Nikkor
80-200/2.8 at aperture 4!

Click to expand...

I am not off focus, the Tokina has the focus problem.

davide gazzotti said:

Sorry chris,
next time try to make both lenses focus on the same subject.
I expect your tokina not to be so much worse than the nikon, when
properly focused.
regards,
dg
---
davide gazzotti
projects: http://www.davidegazzotti.com
works: http://www.davidephoto.com

Click to expand...

David, both lenses were focused on the same subject. The roof of the birdfeeder, with the bottom of the focus box slightly below the roof line. This Tokina IS much worse than the Nikon. I have many, many, many photos to prove it. Anyone who has followed my focusing issues knows this as well.

excal said:

Indeed. And if the exposure is different, then the MTF will be
well off too. This comparison is hopelessly meaningless. Guess,
the focus mark was probably on the top focus square, not the
centre. Also, there's no contrast delta for the AF system to work
on.

Excal

Click to expand...

Excal, You of all should know better. I know you have been following some of my testing. And please don't talk about the difference in exposure. That is what is truly meaningless here. The focus mark was in the center. As I said, I have many, many other pictures that show it. I know I haven't extablished myself as well as others around here, but give me a little credit anyway.

I can't believe that after all the testing I have done with the Tokina, then I finally get a decent lens to compare it against to prove that it's the Tokina and these are the replies it get. Can someone please post something of use here before I go crazy?

okay, even IF the tokina is focused a bit behind (looking at the branches) the other lens is clearly sharper overall.

just my 2 cents - i'm certainly no expert, but i do agree chris, the top one is definitely better.

janetg

oh - and one more thing - my 14 year old daughter has noticed a "focus" difference in the new camera i received from fuji - we were looking through photos she and my other daughter took this weekend while goofing around - and interesting to note that she drew this conclusion on her own - that the new camera seemed to have better focus....

janetg

Hi Rinus,

Yes, the Tokina does seem to be focused at a different distance. That has been my problem with this lens / camera combination all along. I have had two different S2's, two Nikkor 80-200's and a Tokina 80-200. I have tried the Tokina on both S2's and this lens has a back focus problem. Unless someone can tell me if the interface between Tokina vs. S2 is different than the interface between Nikkor vs. S2. I doubt that this is the case though.

Rinus said:

Hi Chris,
Nice lens and it seems to focus well compared to the Tokina.
To be fair, the Tokina seems to be focussed at a different
distance, witness the branches around the bird house.
Maybe the lens is not that bad but the focus motor may not do the
right job.
I use 500/0.3/0 or 350/0.4/0 sharpening but many combinations work
well.
Rinus of Calgary

Click to expand...

You have had some bad luck w/ this particular Tokina lens. I am sure your confidence in Tokina has deminished somewhat as a result.

The price difference is not that much different ($320 for USA model and $100+ for import Nikon). Stick w/ the Nikon 80-200 and save yourself some grief. In addition, your confidence in your lens can only help when you're in the field taken shots. The last thing you want is to wonder if the lens is going to perform to your specs when you're doing actual shooting.

Please don't take it in a wrong way, I am not trashing any non-Nikon lenses. There's are dogs in most manufacturers. My bad experience happened to be w/ Sigma 28-105, 70-210, Tamron 28-210?.

I have had the Nik 80-200 AF (dual rings) for few years now and feel that it is a very good performer. I am happy w/ it. In cases where I found my shots to be soft, even at wide open, it is my handheld technique. I can't blame this lens for the softness.

So if the price difference is not 3-5 times, stick w/ the Nik 80-200 for better peace of mind.

Regards,
The'

I took a few more. In this first picture below, ALL focus points are within the tarp:

Nikkor Lens:



Tokina Lens:



Nikkor Lens:



Tokina Lens:



The differences are even more pronounced at high res, but for the sake of those with lower res monitors and slower connection speeds the images have been resized.

Yes, I agree. I've had two salesmen tell me that the Tokina is "ever better" than the Nikon. It could be that this particular one is just a defect. I have no reason to knock Tokina or any other lens for that matter. I just thought I would share my experience with the lens with others. Personally, I love seeing lens comparisons here. You can ask for opinions on lenses, but since everyone has different tastes in sharpness and quality, seeing for yourself is always best. And it has been a great hassle having to send cameras and lenses back and take them back to the store. So I thought I would give others the benefit of me having each lens side by side. I thought having them side by side would eliminate all the talk back and forth over my method of shooting, but I guess not :-(

You are right about confidence in the field. That is why I have been doing so many static, uninteresting test photos. If I can get good performance on the test stand, I know what I need to do out in the field. I've knocked myself too often in the field thinking I was doing something wrong, only to find the fault was with the equipment.

Some even had me believing that this quality was to be expected since it was a zoom and not a prime. I came close to getting the Nikkor 180mm F2.8 before I decided to give the Nikkor 80-200 one more try. Now I'm glad I did.

The' (teh or tay) said:

You have had some bad luck w/ this particular Tokina lens. I am
sure your confidence in Tokina has deminished somewhat as a result.
The price difference is not that much different ($320 for USA model
and $100+ for import Nikon). Stick w/ the Nikon 80-200 and save
yourself some grief. In addition, your confidence in your lens can
only help when you're in the field taken shots. The last thing you
want is to wonder if the lens is going to perform to your specs
when you're doing actual shooting.

Please don't take it in a wrong way, I am not trashing any
non-Nikon lenses. There's are dogs in most manufacturers. My bad
experience happened to be w/ Sigma 28-105, 70-210, Tamron 28-210?.

I have had the Nik 80-200 AF (dual rings) for few years now and
feel that it is a very good performer. I am happy w/ it. In
cases where I found my shots to be soft, even at wide open, it is
my handheld technique. I can't blame this lens for the softness.
So if the price difference is not 3-5 times, stick w/ the Nik
80-200 for better peace of mind.

Regards,
The'

Click to expand...

Chris G,

I went to your pBase upload area and looked at almost all the samples. It appears 1) that the Tokina is suffering from severe chromatic aberration (aka CA, color fringing,fringing), which is most-evident on the birdhouse photos. The blue fringing around the birdhouse and the tree limbs jumps out at me.

2)the Tokina looks like it is back-focusing a bit. Consistently, the point of sharpest focus is behind the target.

Are these shot through window glass? The Nikkor samples just don't look as sharp as they should to me.
--
Happy Shooting!
Derrel

Tarp: It seems like the Nikon is much sharper all around the image and very few crome abbrevs, were on the Toknia it's easy to see that you did focus on the tarp but its just not sharp any were on the image also look at the crome abbrevs

Tree trunk: The Nikon is almost tack sharp. The tokina looks like it focused on the tree trunk but it's just not very sharp.

The Tokina just does not seem to be as sharp, in all the pictuers you took none of them were in focus any were on the image, it's in the optix I would think!

Chris G said:

I took a few more. In this first picture below, ALL focus points
are within the tarp:

Nikkor Lens:



Tokina Lens:



Nikkor Lens:



Tokina Lens:



The differences are even more pronounced at high res, but for the
sake of those with lower res monitors and slower connection speeds
the images have been resized.

Click to expand...

--
Minolta D7
PC Dual 19' monitors
Epson 780

Hi Derrel,

Thank you for the repsponse and the time to go through the photos. I agree, the blue fringing jumped out at me as well.

I really appreciate your comment on the Nikkor samples as well. They were indeed shot through a window. You are the first to ever notice this. I had wondered about the effect on the pictures as well, but since I was only doing a comparison, they both were affected by the window the same. I wouldn't suspect that the glass would have much if any effect since the bird feeder was so far away, and the window was only a foot or two away from the camera.

But since you brougt it up, I'm going to brave the cold and go snap a few just to check the sharpness on the other side. Keep in mind that I will be a bit closer to the birdfeeder since I will be on the other side of the wall. I'll post the results soon. Thanks again.

Derrel said:

Chris G,

I went to your pBase upload area and looked at almost all the
samples. It appears 1) that the Tokina is suffering from severe
chromatic aberration (aka CA, color fringing,fringing), which is
most-evident on the birdhouse photos. The blue fringing around the
birdhouse and the tree limbs jumps out at me.
2)the Tokina looks like it is back-focusing a bit. Consistently,
the point of sharpest focus is behind the target.

Are these shot through window glass? The Nikkor samples just don't
look as sharp as they should to me.
--
Happy Shooting!
Derrel

Click to expand...

There may be a problem with the motor or the connection. I had a Sigma lens that was over exposing two stops due to a bad chip in everyone of those lenses. I believe they may have been replaced but not until many people had purchased them.
Your lens may have a similar problem in regards to focus.
Hope you get it solved without having to spend a bundle.
Rinus of Calgary

Hi Chris,

There is no benefit in judging the image quality unless you get these lenses to focus in the same place.

I would suggest not take any comments regarding lens quality serious unless the images are in the identical focus.

It is so easy to be disappointed with a lens when the focus is wrong and it is so easy to be happy when it focusses correctly. The same lens can be tolerated if it would only focus sharply on your subject.

I know a few people that changed a few lenses and spend a fortune on brand name lenses simply because they had a bad day and blamed the lens. Your lens focusses incorrectly (mechanical problem) but that does not make the glass bad!
Rinus of Calgary

But it does make the lens bad. If it can't focus correctly for whatever reason, then obviously it is no good. It is going back for a refund. I have proven it to myself beyond a reasonable doubt that this lens on this camera is no good. And it is not because of a bad day. Go back to my posts on focus. I have been struggling with the Tokina for a week now. The sample in my posession is bad. I am a bit ticked, as I have a right to be, that Tokina and my local camera store let this lens to out the door. It has cost me a great deal of time. I was hoping to save someone else that time. If they chose to disagree with my findings, so be it. I have nothing to gain here.

What bugs me even more, is that this is the same lens that I returned to the store back when I was having trouble with my first S2. Had the store done a bit of simple checks, they would have sent the lens back, not put it back on the shelf.

Rinus said:

Hi Chris,

Click to expand...

Member said:

I know a few people that changed a few lenses and spend a fortune
on brand name lenses simply because they had a bad day and blamed
the lens. Your lens focusses incorrectly (mechanical problem) but
that does not make the glass bad!
Rinus of Calgary

Click to expand...

Derrel,

I braved the cold (18 degrees, or 0 with the wind chill factor) and took a few more pics. They probably are not the best for comparison since the wind was quite strong at times and it was difficult to keep the tripod steady. Also keep in mind that these are now about 6 feet closer to the subject. Here is the feeder (I'll bet if I put some feed in there, I may get more interesting pics!). STD camera sharpening, 6MP, no postprocessing:



and another:



And if you like, here is a link to a full size image, saved at high quaility JPG (8 I think):

http://www.pbase.com/image/12729571

I am very interested in your opinion on the sharpness. I am tempted to try and get the stores demo S2 and do some comparisons if you think I should be getting sharper pictures. Thanks again.

Chris G said:

Derrel,
I braved the cold (18 degrees, or 0 with the wind chill factor) and
took a few more pics. They probably are not the best for comparison
since the wind was quite strong at times and it was difficult to
keep the tripod steady. Also keep in mind that these are now about
6 feet closer to the subject. Here is the feeder (I'll bet if I put
some feed in there, I may get more interesting pics!). STD camera
sharpening, 6MP, no postprocessing:



and another:



And if you like, here is a link to a full size image, saved at high
quaility JPG (8 I think):

http://www.pbase.com/image/12729571

I am very interested in your opinion on the sharpness. I am tempted
to try and get the stores demo S2 and do some comparisons if you
think I should be getting sharper pictures. Thanks again.

Click to expand...

Chris

The images with the Tokina are not sharp at all I will agree with you there. Even though the images with the new Nikon 80-200f2.8 are a bit sharper they are not very sharp to my eye either. I have the old non-D version of the 80-200f2.8 and yesterday took some shoots with it out my window all handheld and they seem much sharper....download the originals and see for yourself http://public.fotki.com/borysd/nikon_80-200f28/
Boris
http://public.fotki.com/borysd/
Kodak Instamatic