| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/07/2005 07:03:04 AM · #1 |
| I have been searching for a new lense to my Canon EOS 300D body and have been really influenced by the performance and prize of certain Tokina products in various tests such as www.photozone.de. Has anybody experience about Tokina? Are they too heavy etc. or why are they much more cheapier than its competitors? |
|
|
|
11/07/2005 02:46:24 PM · #2 |
I wouldn't consider the Tokina 12-24 at $499 cheap by any means. I have this new lens and it's a great lens. It is heavier than the other ultrawide zooms, but I love it as it helps to stabilize the camera. It's build quality is excellent, better than the Canon's in many people's opinion. Optics are a bit less than Canon's 10-22, but it's really good. The new 100mm macro rates very well in Popular Photography as well. I don't know about the older Tokina's so I'll refrain from any comments. When it comes time to buy a macro, I'll be considering the Canon 100, Tamron 90, and the Tokina 100.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 02:50:42 PM · #3 |
I use the 20D and D30 and before that various Canon SLRs and have had Tokina lenses for ages, 80-400 , 100 2.8 Macro, 18-35 to name three that I use the most and love them. I have never been able to afford Canon lenses other than the 75-300 IS which I also love, but would highly recommend the Tokina lenses.
I have had all three of these for well over 6 years now
Message edited by author 2005-11-07 14:51:47.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 02:57:04 PM · #4 |
I have used mostly Sigma and Tamron lenses. Each company seems to have their own philosophy and style (just like ford/gm/mercedes, etc). Each has consumer (cheap) and pro lenses (not so cheap). Their pro lenses are about as good as canon's in sharpness, but Tamron's seem to focus faster (from my limited experience).
I want a 70-200 2.8 lens,and the Tokina is the least expensive and have heard good things about it, so it is on my wants list, as is the 12-24.
What lens are you looking for?
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 04:15:52 PM · #5 |
Thank you all for your comments! At this very moment I have compared lenses of Canon, Sigma, Tokina and Tamron and totally placed my trust on the test made by Photozone. Canon is out because of its prices. Tokina have got more points than Sigma and Tamron and in addition to this seems to be much cheaper.
I am very interested in Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SV. A German internet shop technikdirekt.de is selling it for 249 euros.
The Photozone Test (Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SV )
Message edited by mk - fixed superlong link. |
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:15:04 PM · #6 |
In that range the Tamron SP AF28-75MM F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) is usually the one i hear recomended a LOT as an alternative to the Tokina.
I wanted wider, so i went with the Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX DC. Excellent optics and build. Not as fast to focus as my (newly acquired) Tamron SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical (IF). As sharp as the canon 17-40 4L but with more range.
I got to try the canon 17-85 IS USM lens - nice lens! Talk about fast focusing!
I can't give up the 17-28 range...i use it too much. I love the 2.8 as well. But i wanted more than the 50mm woudl give me. I had a (inexpensive) tamron 28-80 3.5-5.6 (fast focusing, acceptable sharp but not enough contrast for my liking, but the price made up for that. very light lens) told me even 80 was not enough for my walking around. I was out yesterday and i love the tamron 24-135. Still wanted wider once or twice, but i have a lens for that now.
My current thinking..and it is subject to change...
Tokina or sigma 80-200 2.8, and then a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter.
something in the 11-18/10-22/12-24 range. the 12-24 is leading the pack.
a 100mm macro lens
Since i use the the 18-50 sigma for low light (indoor and weddings mostly) it has a place in my bag. I'd like to try the canon 17-40 and tamron 17-35 lenses - i'd like faster focusing. The Tamon 28-70 2.8 could then be my main low light lens...maybe. still a year or more off on making this decision.
See, this is not easy for any of us (with budgets) and you can always sell the lens and move on to something else.
We won;t get into the APS vs Full frame debate as that just makes these choices all the more complicated.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:20:11 PM · #7 |
There's nothing like a Canon lens (well except a Nikon lens)...that's what was designed to work with your camera by your camera manufacturer...in fact under some conditions, Canon may try to point the finger at Tokina for a problem with your camera, and suggest you try it with a Canon lens...either way, it makes the process harder than it has to be...I'm not saying there aren't many owners of third party lenses out there, but my opinion is get the Canon (or the Nikon) and be done with it...do it right the first time so it doesn't need re-done.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:34:48 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by deapee:
There's nothing like a Canon lens (well except a Nikon lens)...that's what was designed to work with your camera by your camera manufacturer...in fact under some conditions, Canon may try to point the finger at Tokina for a problem with your camera, and suggest you try it with a Canon lens...either way, it makes the process harder than it has to be...I'm not saying there aren't many owners of third party lenses out there, but my opinion is get the Canon (or the Nikon) and be done with it...do it right the first time so it doesn't need re-done. |
You paying the difference?
the canon 24-70 2.8L is $1,114 after rebate. The Tokina 28-80 2.8 is $469 after rebate.
I got the sigma 18-50 for $440. The canon 17-40 4L has less range, is slower and costs (at the time i bought) $260 more. I just bought a Tamron SP24-135 for $413. THe canon 18-85 might have IS, but is $186 more. The savings on those two lenses is almost enough to buy the Tokina...3 lenses for the price of 2, and no optical trade off.
I assume you buy the oil, antifreeze, oil filters and such for your truck at a Ford dealer? When you had your Jeep you bought only Jeep parts for it, right?
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:52:32 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by deapee:
There's nothing like a Canon lens (well except a Nikon lens)...that's what was designed to work with your camera by your camera manufacturer...in fact under some conditions, Canon may try to point the finger at Tokina for a problem with your camera, and suggest you try it with a Canon lens...either way, it makes the process harder than it has to be...I'm not saying there aren't many owners of third party lenses out there, but my opinion is get the Canon (or the Nikon) and be done with it...do it right the first time so it doesn't need re-done. |
You paying the difference?
the canon 24-70 2.8L is $1,114 after rebate. The Tokina 28-80 2.8 is $469 after rebate.
I got the sigma 18-50 for $440. The canon 17-40 4L has less range, is slower and costs (at the time i bought) $260 more. I just bought a Tamron SP24-135 for $413. THe canon 18-85 might have IS, but is $186 more. The savings on those two lenses is almost enough to buy the Tokina...3 lenses for the price of 2, and no optical trade off.
I assume you buy the oil, antifreeze, oil filters and such for your truck at a Ford dealer? When you had your Jeep you bought only Jeep parts for it, right? |
uhm...no, I'm not paying the difference.
And yes, you're right...I use only Motorcraft oil and filter, but that's beyond the point...MANY people agree with me -- that's why the canon is so much more and they get away with it because people feel the same way.
I'm sorry you don't feel the same way, Chris, but why do you feel the need to quote me, point out exactly how wrong you think I am, then make a stupid comparison with vehicles? That's my main problem anymore...you shared your opinion, I shared mine...leave it at that, why must I always be asked to explain myself further?
--
If you want to know the truth...I think you're cheap. You use sub-quality lenses and camera accessories because you don't want to pay top-dollar for the high-quality gear out there. I'm sorry you feel that way, and I'm sorry that any clients you get will be having their photos taken with below par gear.
I'd rather have one TOP OF THE LINE lens and flash then 4 cheap third party pieces of junk and 2 junky flashes...that's my opinion...I don't want to debate the topic or explain myself further...that's just how I feel.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:58:06 PM · #10 |
If you are looking in the 20-'s-70 range zoom. I'd recommend either the Tamron 28-75 or a Sigma 24-60EX. Go see their reviews at Popular Photography online. They are rated very high in terms of optics.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 05:58:22 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by deapee:
I'd rather have one TOP OF THE LINE lens and flash then 4 cheap third party pieces of junk and 2 junky flashes...that's my opinion... |
So, why is it that you're shooting with a D70, and not a D2X?... |
|
|
|
11/07/2005 06:01:45 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by tryals15:
Originally posted by deapee:
I'd rather have one TOP OF THE LINE lens and flash then 4 cheap third party pieces of junk and 2 junky flashes...that's my opinion... |
So, why is it that you're shooting with a D70, and not a D2X?... |
Because I'D RATHER HAVE ONE TOP OF THE LINE LENS AND FLASH THAN 4 CHEAP THIRD PARTY PIECES OF JUNK AND TWO JUNKY FLASHES. Shall I restate it again so you read it this time? I obviously can't afford a d2x or I'd have one. The d70 does what I need it to do...anymore questions?
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 06:04:22 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by tryals15:
Originally posted by deapee:
I'd rather have one TOP OF THE LINE lens and flash then 4 cheap third party pieces of junk and 2 junky flashes...that's my opinion... |
So, why is it that you're shooting with a D70, and not a D2X?... |
Because I'D RATHER HAVE ONE TOP OF THE LINE LENS AND FLASH THAN 4 CHEAP THIRD PARTY PIECES OF JUNK AND TWO JUNKY FLASHES. Shall I restate it again so you read it this time? I obviously can't afford a d2x or I'd have one. The d70 does what I need it to do...anymore questions? |
Nahw, I think I got it... I was just pointing out that we buy what we can afford... and most of us can't afford the best of everything in life, so we make sacrifices where we must... |
|
|
|
11/07/2005 06:14:03 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by tryals15:
Nahw, I think I got it... I was just pointing out that we buy what we can afford... and most of us can't afford the best of everything in life, so we make sacrifices where we must... |
And there's nothing wrong with that...I understand that, and in my original response was making an attempt to just add my opinion quickly without much interruption to the continuing thread.
Then I started getting asked if I was going to pay the difference and this and that and compare it to completely un-related scenerios...I understand that people get what they can afford...I was just trying to add my thoughts that IF you can afford the canon lens, that you should definately save up a little bit longer and just get it...
Like I said though...I was TRYING to not get too involved...just throw my opinion in, and get back out.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 10:09:25 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by no-one in particular:
Not to quote and upset folks is good karma |
The thread was started asking about Tokina becuase Canon lenses were too expensive. I chimed in that third party lenses are fine, and that while i have no experience with Tokina, Tamron and Sigma offer fine products that should be considered.
You then stepped in sounding rather high and mighty and inferring that canon will not honor a warranty if one uses a non-canon accessory.
I simply compared that there are acceptable third party items, from simply oil and filters for cars on up that work just fine, have no adversse affect on warranty and offer the consumer a choice in function, price, features and warranty. You then get all pissed off.
From several of your recent thread postings you seem to be rather stressed. Perhaps it is from paying high prices for lenses and doing without other things in life. Or is it any opinion but your own is wrong?
Message edited by author 2005-11-07 22:10:59.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 10:12:58 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by no-one in particular:
Not to quote and upset folks is good karma |
The thread was started asking about Tokina becuase Canon lenses were too expensive. I chimed in that third party lenses are fine, and that while i have no experience with Tokina, Tamron and Sigma offer fine products that should be considered.
You then stepped in sounding rather high and mighty and inferring that canon will not honor a warranty if one uses a non-canon accessory.
I simply compared that there are acceptable third party items, from simply oil and filters for cars on up that work just fine, have no adversse affect on warranty and offer the consumer a choice in function, price, features and warranty. You then get all pissed off.
From several of your recent thread postings you seem to be rather stressed. Perhaps it is from paying high prices for lenses and doing without other things in life. Or is it any opinion but your own is wrong? |
You're right, I apologize. I have changed my outlook on the community here and I intend to give back. Check my profile, I've added a pledge. I realize I've probably p*ssed a few people off with my ramblings in the past, and understandably so. I intend to earn that friendship back through the long-run. I truly am sorry Chris, you didn't deserve that.
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 10:24:33 PM · #17 |
Thanks. I didn't mean to bait you, and didn't intend you for you to take it that way. You do seem stressed - we can get together to go shooting if you'd like, have a beer or coffee. I have been there, and will be again.
I would tend to agree that Canon lenses are best, but I am skeptical of marketing and hype, and things of that sort. I spent 11 years in teh motorcycle industry and much of the honda/yamaha/etc chrome parts (as in factory parts) are made by cobra, DG, etc and just repackaged - so not factory parts afterall! And repriced higher with the change in packaging.
Usually you get what you pay for, but not everyone needs or can afford the best out there. If i waited to buy the best, i'd still be saving and not shooting pics. If all you ever do is look at the pics on screen or print 4x6's, any lens will do ust fine. You want 16x20 prints, then the best lens you can find (as opposed to afford) is the one to use.
WOuld i like to use a canon 24-105 IS USM lens instead of my tamron 24-135? Yes, probably. But i have talked with folks that moved up and are not totally happy. The $800 or so difference can be used for lots ot things - another lens, a better (camera) body, flash equipment, a photography seminar...
Lets look at it from a purley dollar perspective - you (and i) want to make money with our hobby. There is such a thing as ROI - return on investment. If we both charge the same but i can do it with 1/2 the investment, i make more money. Your better lenses may make a difference, real or perceived, but i more equipment and that will almost certainly improve my capabilities and chances to get the pic, the job, the money.
Different strokes for different folks - it keeps the world interesting!
|
|
|
|
11/07/2005 10:29:09 PM · #18 |
well-said Chris...I think you have my number. As soon as you want to shoot, call me...or start a thread...do you think anyone from Pittsburgh would shot up heh?
|
|
|
|
11/08/2005 02:42:46 AM · #19 |
Thank you once again for a valuable information you have given in this thread. It takes a little time for me to check the models you mentioned and then I make a big decision... It is, indeed, extremely difficult to find a suitable and long lasting lense to your personal needs.
And when coming to Helsinki (try to find where it is situated, heh) we can have a coffee here, too! |
|
|
|
11/08/2005 11:21:58 AM · #20 |
Along the same lines as the original question...
I heard from one of the guys at my local camera shop that Promasters stuff (lenses) are actually made by tokina and tamron... that it's the same exact stuff?
Any truth to that? And if so, what's the difference (Aside from price...) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 07:56:49 AM EDT.
