Posted by Jack Garrett on February 11, 2009 at 1:08 AM
Anybody here got a Tokina 12-24 lens? If so, how do you like it?
Jack
Posted by Adam Schallau on February 11, 2009 at 1:27 AM
I had it a few years ago when it first hit the market. I really liked using it for both its solid build and optical qualities. The shop I manage sells it and it is more popular than the Canon equivalent, but I'm sure that's partly due to it being cheaper than the Canon.
Posted by Kalin Wilson on February 11, 2009 at 1:49 AM
Hey Jack,
I actually bought this lens in 2007 after doing a lot of research. It came down to the Tokina and the Canon 10-22 and price won. Shortly after buying it, I met up with Mel Ladewig at Garden of the Gods to do some comparison shots with Mel's 10-22. After comparing a large series of shots at different focal lengths, apertures, and lighting conditions, I ended up returning the Tokina and buying the Canon.
I found the Canon to have better edge-to-edge sharpness at wider apertures and quite a bit better contrast. Overall, I liked the image quality of the Canon better. Of course, during my research I heard from plenty of people that were very happy with their Tokina's.
One option you might consider, Glass and Gear has a lot of lenses for rent at pretty good prices. You might rent both and do your own comparison.
Good luck!
Posted by John Mumaw on February 11, 2009 at 7:50 AM
I've never seen a bad review or comment on that lens yet.
However, an extra 2mm on the wide end makes a big difference as you can see from the chart above.
I have the Sigma 10-22 wide angle lens and it's truly excellent in all regards.
It also costs $250 less than the comparable in quality Canon lens and, unlike the Canon lens, comes with a lens hood (!) and a fine case.
Posted by Paul Wegemann on February 11, 2009 at 8:02 AM
I've got the Tokina 12-24 and I'm very happy with it, but I wish it went just a bit wider, as John's image above demonstrates. I mostly shoot stopped down and find that it has good edge to edge sharpness and contrast although I've never directly compared it to another wide angle. It is subject to flare though, but I keep that in mind when shooting. Considering the price when I bought it, I'm happy with the purchase.
Posted by Jack Garrett on February 11, 2009 at 10:03 AM
I like that chart John. If i was using the 10-22 on a grand scenic, would I see the curve normally associated with a fisheye? I dont know if I asked that question right but I think you know what Im referring to.
Jack
Posted by Erik Stensland on February 11, 2009 at 10:14 AM
I'm curious about this lens as well. I'm assuming that what has been said so far has not been based on shooting with a full-frame camera. Any thoughts on how these lenses function with FF?
Posted by Brent Murphy on February 11, 2009 at 10:58 AM
I've had the Tokina 12-24 for a little over a year now, and absolutely love it. I bought it when I bought my D300. My only regret is the fact that I now wish I had the newer Tokina 11-16 2.8 instead. I would love to shoot night skies with f2.8 instead of the f4. But overall, I'm extremely happy with this lens.
Posted by Jack Garrett on February 11, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Erik,
As far as I know, this lens is only available for APS_C sensors:
Posted by Laurie Wendt on February 11, 2009 at 1:40 PM
Thanks Jack for asking this question and thanks Brent for making me aware of the Tokina 11-16. I'll be ordering one soon as I can find one available with a Nikon mount.
Posted by Jim Casteel on February 11, 2009 at 1:51 PM
Jack,
If you have a Canon I hear there is nothing better to buy than the 10-22. I have the 12-24mm Tokina for Nikon, I bought it because it nearly as good as the 12-24 Nikon at 1/2 the price. It is a fantastic lens and very sharp. I have to be careful with filters because dust on filters can show up in images with this lens. I am sure it is not much different with the Canon or Nikon.
Posted by Kalin Wilson on February 11, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Jack,
I have a little distortion on the wide end but nothing like a fish-eye. I use DxO for lens corrections and it does really well with my 20D files (haven't got the version for the 5DII yet. I recommend DxO for lens sharpness, geometry, and aberration related corrections, especially for the super-wides!
Congrats on the new lens.
Posted by Pam Colander on February 11, 2009 at 7:38 PM
I think it's a very good quality lens (performance wise) particularly for the money. I get full focal range on my 10D (1.6 crop factor) but not with my 5D (FF). Starts to barrel severely under 19mm. Only complaint is both rubber focus rings deteriorated and fell off before 1 1/2 years.
Posted by Ken Einig on February 12, 2009 at 8:40 PM
I've used my Tok with a D-200 and am quite happy for the extra wide it allows me, ( but I liked my 24 mm Nikkor non-dx-film lensr better:-)
Posted by Bob Falcone on February 13, 2009 at 6:09 PM
I've had one since they came out (had to hunt around to even find one), and have been very happy with it. Good sharpness (unbeatable at f/8), contrast, no vignetting....
It CAN be used on FF or film bodies, but will vignette below 19mm. The Canon version is the standard EF mount.
Discussion
14 repliesJack
I actually bought this lens in 2007 after doing a lot of research. It came down to the Tokina and the Canon 10-22 and price won. Shortly after buying it, I met up with Mel Ladewig at Garden of the Gods to do some comparison shots with Mel's 10-22. After comparing a large series of shots at different focal lengths, apertures, and lighting conditions, I ended up returning the Tokina and buying the Canon.
I found the Canon to have better edge-to-edge sharpness at wider apertures and quite a bit better contrast. Overall, I liked the image quality of the Canon better. Of course, during my research I heard from plenty of people that were very happy with their Tokina's.
One option you might consider, Glass and Gear has a lot of lenses for rent at pretty good prices. You might rent both and do your own comparison.
Good luck!
However, an extra 2mm on the wide end makes a big difference as you can see from the chart above.
I have the Sigma 10-22 wide angle lens and it's truly excellent in all regards.
It also costs $250 less than the comparable in quality Canon lens and, unlike the Canon lens, comes with a lens hood (!) and a fine case.
Jack
As far as I know, this lens is only available for APS_C sensors:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tokina_12-24_f4_review.html
Jack
If you have a Canon I hear there is nothing better to buy than the 10-22. I have the 12-24mm Tokina for Nikon, I bought it because it nearly as good as the 12-24 Nikon at 1/2 the price. It is a fantastic lens and very sharp. I have to be careful with filters because dust on filters can show up in images with this lens. I am sure it is not much different with the Canon or Nikon.
I have a little distortion on the wide end but nothing like a fish-eye. I use DxO for lens corrections and it does really well with my 20D files (haven't got the version for the 5DII yet. I recommend DxO for lens sharpness, geometry, and aberration related corrections, especially for the super-wides!
Congrats on the new lens.
It CAN be used on FF or film bodies, but will vignette below 19mm. The Canon version is the standard EF mount.