Tokina 17-35 f4

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP bkkm New Member • Posts: 16
Re: Tokina 17-35 f4

J i m wrote:

I have owned both Tokina lenses. The 16-28 is a superior optic, but it is huge, heavy and does not allow filters.

If you plan to shoot mostly landscape, then the 17-35 is not a bad option. For landscapes you will most likely shoot around f/11, where the corners improve at all but the very edge. Plus, you can use filters on it.

I've heard of decentering issues on both lenses. Neither of mine were bad. I just sold my 16-28 because I find I need to use filters more often than I thought.


Thanks for the reply, Jim! So you sold your 16-28 -- but does that mean you kept the 17-35? Also, I have seen some sample shots with the 17-35 where at its widest it shows visible lack of sharpness, but stopping down to 5.6 is enough to produce very sharp images. Whereas on other sample shots, including some large RAW files, one could get pretty good sharpness at f4. What was your experience with the sample that you've got? Was yours  usable at f4?

Also, even though the 16-28 is cleary superior optically to the 17-35, would you say the gap between them is very large?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow