Reading mode: Light Dark

What is wrong with this lens? Tokina 24MM

Go to last post
L

LaLaPico

Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
Hello everyone!



Well, I just bought a Tokina RMC 24mm F/2.8 with the Nikon AI Mount from eBay... I have a Canon 600D. I bought an appropriate adapter and.... This is what I get.

First at F 2.8... Unusable! Fuzzy, soft, and any type of light is getting smeared....



b8d68a0ab51c4ad984e91d891459ad82.jpg





And this is at F/16... It's better, and the center looks great. But... The edges are smeared, blurry, hazy, fuzzy.... It looks like a Warp Blur or Radial Blur filter.

5e2491ef4e51400d80d27da8585c3dfa.jpg



What do you think? Decentered Element? Tilted Element?
 
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.

Your questions may get more attention in the Third Party Lens and Adapted Lenses section of these forums. Tokina is what is termed a "Third Party" lens.

I have used a Tokina-made, Vivitar-branded 17mm f/3.5 lens, AI mount, on Canon cameras, with a Novoflex EOS/NIK adapter. I experienced no problems.

I wish I could be more helpful.
 
What brand adapter did you buy? I am guessing the optical correction lens in the adapter is crap.
 
the Forum needs a You Get What You Pay For channel. this thread could get that channel started.
 
No, it doesn't have an optical element, as AI mount to EOS doesn't required any optical adjustment, just a mounting conversion adapter.
 
My guess would be - disassembled and put back together incorrectly. Rear group in these old wide angles often has 3 or 4 elements and the ones inside are fairly easy to flip over on accident. Spacers can be equally easy to install the other way around.
 
Rexgig0 said:
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.
Click to expand...
And that is just nonsense or hyperbole.
Rexgig0 said:
Your questions may get more attention in the Third Party Lens and Adapted Lenses section of these forums. Tokina is what is termed a "Third Party" lens.

I have used a Tokina-made, Vivitar-branded 17mm f/3.5 lens, AI mount, on Canon cameras, with a Novoflex EOS/NIK adapter. I experienced no problems.

I wish I could be more helpful.

--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
Click to expand...
 
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.
Click to expand...
And that is just nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
I have never before heard anyone say that Roger Cicala's data is nonsense or hyperbole.

I do know that my particular, individual AF 16mm f/2.8D Fisheye will not quite focus on infinity, when used on my particular, individual 5D, with my particular, individual EOS/NIK adapter, even though this same adapter performs well with my particular, individual Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S and particular, individual Zoom-Nikkor 100-300/5.6 AI-S. My Fisheye focuses on infinity with my Nikon cameras.

Of course, this is anecdotal, not data points. Take it for what it is worth.

I am not saying that my Nikkor Fisheye + Novoflex EOS/NIK + 5D is anywhere near as bad as the OP's combination of equipment. I would not know how much of an error would be needed to produce such a result.
 
Rexgig0 said:
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.
Click to expand...
And that is just nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
I have never before heard anyone say that Roger Cicala's data is nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Oh well, then this was a 1st for you. Optical consequences... A hyperbole indeed.
Rexgig0 said:
I do know that my particular, individual AF 16mm f/2.8D Fisheye will not quite focus on infinity, when used on my particular, individual 5D, with my particular, individual EOS/NIK adapter, even though this same adapter performs well with my particular, individual Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S and particular, individual Zoom-Nikkor 100-300/5.6 AI-S. My Fisheye focuses on infinity with my Nikon cameras.
Click to expand...
Then your adapter is not thick enough. Does that has an OPTICAL consequence? No.

Why does it focus to infinity with the other lenses? Because most lenses focus a tad past infinity. And why is it your shortest one affected? The shorter the focal length, the more small the impact of the small difference in correct flange distance.

Get an adapter of correct thickness. By the way, can you show a photo of the adapter, preferably at an angle so the thickness shows (and the locking mechanism shows)?
Rexgig0 said:
Of course, this is anecdotal, not data points. Take it for what it is worth.

I am not saying that my Nikkor Fisheye + Novoflex EOS/NIK + 5D is anywhere near as bad as the OP's combination of equipment. I would not know how much of an error would be needed to produce such a result.
Click to expand...
No error in adapter caused what the OP's lens shows.
Rexgig0 said:
--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.
Click to expand...
And that is just nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
I have never before heard anyone say that Roger Cicala's data is nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Oh well, then this was a 1st for you. Optical consequences... A hyperbole indeed.
brightcolours said:
I do know that my particular, individual AF 16mm f/2.8D Fisheye will not quite focus on infinity, when used on my particular, individual 5D, with my particular, individual EOS/NIK adapter, even though this same adapter performs well with my particular, individual Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S and particular, individual Zoom-Nikkor 100-300/5.6 AI-S. My Fisheye focuses on infinity with my Nikon cameras.
Click to expand...
Then your adapter is not thick enough. Does that has an OPTICAL consequence? No.

Why does it focus to infinity with the other lenses? Because most lenses focus a tad past infinity. And why is it your shortest one affected? The shorter the focal length, the more small the impact of the small difference in correct flange distance.

Get an adapter of correct thickness. By the way, can you show a photo of the adapter, preferably at an angle so the thickness shows (and the locking mechanism shows)?
Click to expand...
Well, it seems to me that an adapter with an out-of-spec dimension, that causes an incorrect flange distance for an optical instrument, such as a lens, is, indeed, having an optical consequence. Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on the definitions of the words "optical" and "consequence." :-) I will discuss this part no further.

This does not mean, however, that I am insisting a faulty adapter is the cause of the OP's problem. The OP should, probably, return the lens to the seller, if that is an available option.
 
Rexgig0 said:
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
brightcolours said:
Rexgig0 said:
What do you mean by "appropriate adapter?" Find Roger Cicala's blog post on adapters; even the best, such as Novoflex, can have optical consequences.
Click to expand...
And that is just nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
I have never before heard anyone say that Roger Cicala's data is nonsense or hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Oh well, then this was a 1st for you. Optical consequences... A hyperbole indeed.
Rexgig0 said:
I do know that my particular, individual AF 16mm f/2.8D Fisheye will not quite focus on infinity, when used on my particular, individual 5D, with my particular, individual EOS/NIK adapter, even though this same adapter performs well with my particular, individual Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S and particular, individual Zoom-Nikkor 100-300/5.6 AI-S. My Fisheye focuses on infinity with my Nikon cameras.
Click to expand...
Then your adapter is not thick enough. Does that has an OPTICAL consequence? No.

Why does it focus to infinity with the other lenses? Because most lenses focus a tad past infinity. And why is it your shortest one affected? The shorter the focal length, the more small the impact of the small difference in correct flange distance.

Get an adapter of correct thickness. By the way, can you show a photo of the adapter, preferably at an angle so the thickness shows (and the locking mechanism shows)?
Click to expand...
Well, it seems to me that an adapter with an out-of-spec dimension, that causes an incorrect flange distance for an optical instrument, such as a lens, is, indeed, having an optical consequence. Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on the definitions of the words "optical" and "consequence." :-) I will discuss this part no further.
Click to expand...
I still would like to see your adapter, though. Reason: I know of a certain kind, sold by various resellers, which is not thick enough (I bought one myself). It would be interesting to see if yours is a similar one.
Rexgig0 said:
This does not mean, however, that I am insisting a faulty adapter is the cause of the OP's problem. The OP should, probably, return the lens to the seller, if that is an available option.

--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
Click to expand...
 
My adapter is a Novoflex EOS/NIK, bought from a reputable local camera store. It remained, for some time, on a Zoom-Nikkor 100-300/5.6 AI-S, with which it worked well, but it is not still there.

I think I remember bringing the adapter with me, when I was considering trading some things toward the purchase of a lens, but I do not believe I actually traded it. I seem to have misplaced it; sorry. It would be nice to measure it for being within proper specifications.

--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
 
Last edited:
brightcolours said:
I still would like to see your adapter, though. Reason: I know of a certain kind, sold by various resellers, which is not thick enough (I bought one myself). It would be interesting to see if yours is a similar one.
Click to expand...
Most of the budget Chinese adapters are done that way - it's safer to make an adapter that will go a bit past infinity than one that won't reach it.
 
Suave said:
brightcolours said:
I still would like to see your adapter, though. Reason: I know of a certain kind, sold by various resellers, which is not thick enough (I bought one myself). It would be interesting to see if yours is a similar one.
Click to expand...
Most of the budget Chinese adapters are done that way - it's safer to make an adapter that will go a bit past infinity than one that won't reach it.
Click to expand...
I have 3 "chinese" adapters. 2 or fine thickness wise, one is too thin.
Suave said:
--
Where's my new 50, Canon?
Click to expand...
 
I have a dozen, for a couple of different cameras, I think one is ok.
 
I found the problem with the lens --- a flipped element. The seller decided to refund my money without me sending the lens back, and since it was a worthless lens as it was, I decided to take it apart. I couldn't figure out what was wrong or missing, and then got brave enough to unscrew the pieces of the rear element assembly...



Through some trial and error, I found the very center element, the hardest one to get to, was flipped.

Here's a picture at F/2.8

52ad51c6a92d425faf8b3db287f70a07.jpg
 
LaLaPico said:
I found the problem with the lens --- a flipped element. The seller decided to refund my money without me sending the lens back, and since it was a worthless lens as it was, I decided to take it apart. I couldn't figure out what was wrong or missing, and then got brave enough to unscrew the pieces of the rear element assembly...

Through some trial and error, I found the very center element, the hardest one to get to, was flipped.

Here's a picture at F/2.8

52ad51c6a92d425faf8b3db287f70a07.jpg
Click to expand...
Glad to see you found the reversed element. I do not know if it is possible still, but you could consider giving the seller half of the money now that you got things working fine.

Anyhow, enjoy the lens (and don't mind too much the nonsense that gets written about adapters and adapted lenses).
 
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