Thoughts on Tokina 12-24mm ATX Pro lens?

I'm considering the purchase of this lens and am interested to hear comments from anyone with hands-on experience. I've used Tokina lenses in the past and have been quite happy with them. Anyone used the 12-24mm and care to share your thoughts on build quality, image quality, etc.?

Thanks!

Well, these are built to work optimally with 1.6x FOV cameras.
I thought you owned a full frame (or nearly so) camera.

I've owned this lens for about a year now and am pleased with it. I purchased it to replace my 18-35mm lens that I was using on my D200, but was no longer wide enough due to the sensor crop. I think the build quality on this lens is on par with the pro level Nikon lenses I own. At nearly half the price of the Nikon 12-24mm lens, any lack in IQ compared to that lens is so little as to make forking over the bucks for the Nikon version be not worth it to me. The focus clutch on this lens is nice, but I don't think I've ever used it. The link is to a recent pic I took using this lens.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v20/Teewinot/CNP/SnowyRangeColumbines-2.jpg

John: I pre-ordered the Canon 50D and need a nice wide angle lens to go with it. I'm holding on to the 1Ds MKII until the 5D replacement is released, at which point I'll use the 50D as a back-up and the 5D II (or whatever they decide to call it) as the primary body.

Doug: Thanks for the info. and the image link. Very nice photo, by the way!

Bret,

I own a Tokina lens, but not this one. Their build quality is top notch on par with Canon L. The way they've implemented AF/MF switch is a bit different. The MF ring turns like old school lenses (not clunky like a Canon EF lens). The AF is relatively quite and fast. The image quality is usually quite good (often better than Sigma or Tamron) but they do tend to have a little more CA than Canon L lenses. Luckily the CA is the easy to fix type.

Ultimately I chose the Canon 10-22 over the Tokina primarily because it is much lighter and if you can believe it after the nasty things Darren and Jimmy Gekas have said about my backpack at Blue Lakes, keeping pack weight down is important to me. When I bought my 10-22 it was on sale at B&H and was only about $100 more than the Tokina. If you have the 17-40L, the hood is shared with the 10-22.

Mel-

Mel: Have you been happy w/ the image quality and build quality of the 10-22mm lens? I've read some reviews and most find the IQ to be quite good, but the build quality not quite as burly as the Tokina (or, obviously, the "L" series glass).

Bret,
I used to use this lens on my 30D -- before I purchased a 5D. The build quality was at least on par with my 17-40. I actually liked the focus clutch design, it was really easy to use. Image quality was also as good as I could have imagined, there is a little more CA as Mel said. You'll likely find as many people who swear by the Canon as the Tokina, in reality they are both excellent lenses. From what I've read the Tokina and Canon are close enough in image quality, the Tokina is better built but the Canon has USM and zooms out to 10mm. The Tokina is also less expensive, which mattered to me when I bought mine -- and I think it has a 3 year warranty. You really can't go wrong with either, it just comes down to a few differences.

Thanks for the clarification, Bret.
I've heard nothing but good things about the Tokina lens, but in the end 12mm just wasn't wide enough for me compared to 10mm, as you can see in this wide angle chart.

I chose the Sigma 10-20 lens after studying these wide angle lens test comparisons between the Canon 10-22 and the Sigma (the Tokina is also included in those tests), and this dedicated, extensive Sigma 10-20 lens test (The Tokina is tested there, as well).

I'm extremely pleased with the image quality from this lens! At almost $200 less than the Canon lens, it was an easy decision for me. Sigma also includes a lens hood, which Canon couldn't be bothered with bundling with their lens for some reason.

Best of luck with whatever decision you make!

Bret,
When I moved up from my 300D to the 5D there was only one lens that I hated to give up, the Tokina 12-24. I'm considering the same setup that you are going to have and will most likely get a 12-24 again for the 50D.

I'm hopeful that we will have a 50D in our shop sometime in October and the first thing I'm going to do is slap the 12-24 on it. I'll let you know what I think.

Thanks, Adam and John!

I have no complaints about the image quality from my copy. However, in less than one year after purchase, one of the rubber adjustment rings (there are two) became very brittle and fell off. The second met the same fate about 2 months ago so now I have none. Does this affect image quality...no. Does it make it harder to find the adjustment area on the lens w/o looking...absolutely. Am I p*ssed because I've heard nothing from Tokina after contacting them...oh yeah Would I buy another Tokina lens...probably yes if I'd gotten some resolution from the company but since I have not...no. The very first lens I bought when I got my 10D in 2004 was a Tokina 19-35mm...not expensive...no problems with the rubber on it.

Pam

I've had no problems with my Nikon-mount version. It flares a little more than the Nikon 12-24 I rented a few times before buying the Tokina, and it's got a little more CA, but I have no complaints whatsoever. Image sharpness is great, lens operation is fine, and I don't need USM or any other fancy features on my ultra-wide angle lens.

A lot of the shots I posted from Capitol Reef this year were taken with that lens, as were most of my winter Dream Lake shots and this shot I originally posted to ES&S (now slightly revised...).

I'm also quite happy with the Tokina 12-24 and agree with what's been said above. I'm using it on a 30D.

I bought this lens when I got my D300 at the beginning of the year. I really love it. Build quality seems excellent, and I've been very happy with the photos. This is my most-used lens right now. My only problem with it has been that between the 77mm filter size and the large hood, it's rather bulky and doesn't fit into some of my smaller cases very well (Lowepro Off Road and Topload Zoom). But I can usually figure out a way to make it work.

I'll highly recommend this lens.

I've had one for about a year now and no problems or complaints. It's very sharp, and aside from a little CA (easily corrected) the IQ is great. I'd recommend it without question. I use it on a Nikon D80

I've used the Tokina as well back when I was shooting a 20D and highly recommend it. Great bang for the buck. That said, have you considered the Sigma 12-24? It is supposedly a very good lens also (although it suffers from variability from copy to copy). The advantage it has is that it comes in an EF mount so you'd be able to use it on both your 50D and 5D II. I'm seriously considering taking a chance on that lens in the near future as I'm looking at moving to the same camera setup as you. Its biggest drawback that I can see is that it doesn't accept filters on the front element. Although I'd never use a polarizer on something that wide anyway, the occasional ND filter usage could be an issue.

Hmm... As far as I can tell, you should be able to use 77mm filters on the front element. However, I don't have any 77mm filters, so I haven't use normal filters on this lens.

I have tried using GNDs on this lens, though, and even with the "wide-angle" holder from Cokin, you will still get vignetting at 12mm. I've been hand-holding my GNDs on this lens instead. (Or even better, I've started using HDR and getting better results than I could get with a GND).

Have you considered the 'new' Tokina 11-16 f2.8? Build quality is comparable to that of the 12-24, image quality is great (a bit CA, which is quite easy to get rid of). It's about $570 at most places, which is only slightly more expensive than the 12-24, but you'll get this extra 1mm at the wide end (which seems like nothing, but is 8.5% wider!), and f2.8. There are plenty of reviews around on the web.

Oh yeah, I forgot about the 11-16. Not much of a zoom range, but when I saw the ad in a recent OP, I considered ditching the 12-24 and buying the 11-16 instead. Shooting the night sky with a wide-angle 2.8 would be fantastic.

I have been using the 12-24 for almost 8 months now. it is by far my favorite lens. I tried several other lenses but they felt cheap. When you grab this lens you know that it is a professional lens. If I were to buy again today I would go with the 11-16. It is wider and sharper than most of the other lenses. However I have also heard that if you own a Canon the 10-22 canon is the way to go. If you own Nikon I would get the Tokina over the Nikon.

Thanks to all who have responded. It sounds like the 12-24 is an all-around nice lens. I'll look into the Sigma as it would be nice to be able to use it on both cameras.

I'm sure you already know this, but a great place to read about real world experiences with the Sigma is at FM's review page at...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=184&sort=7&cat=37&page=1