I am thinking of buying the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X for my Nikon D200.
Ken Rockwell seems quite enthusiatic about it.
What do you think - any experiences?
Thanks in advance

Lars :-)

Hey Lars,

I had that lens when I was shooting with a D300 - great lens - sharp and a solid build. AF was smooth and unlike the nikon you can put filters on it.

Check this site :-)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1152/cat/33

/Wulff

Exactly why I ruled my favourite Nikon 14-24 out (also because of the Nikons f/4 limit and the price!)

Tokina lenses are very good!Try,also,10-17 from them!I'll have it one day!

I too have been curious about this lens. I did read Ken's review. I have the Tokina 12-24 f4 and love it. I use it a lot. I even use it on my F100, as Ken says you can use these lenses on full frame cameras if you don't zoom out all the way. Mine is good with very minimal if no vignetting out to @18mm on full frame. I shoot mostly landscape and usually at f8 or smaller. I'm not sure what advantage this lens would have for me??? But it sure does get a lot of praise!!

My 12-24 seems to have held pretty good re-sale value, so I think I could have this newer lens for @$200-250. Any thoughts??

I have had the Tokina 11-16 for a year and a half. I paid a small premium to get it as I was going to a photo workshop. I love this lens. My copy seems extremely sharp, although I have read that some people have gotten copies that are not as sharp. The ability to use filters is a real plus. The distortion seems very little. This is my favorite lens at the moment. I would highly recommned it.

A few weeks ago I bought and sent this lens to someone in SA, and they are now smiling from ear to ear. Excellent buy.

Yes, but I would like to have the f/2.8-possibility by Tokina 11-16 mm, considering the small focal lenght!

Thanks!

Lars :-)

Bought the tokina 11-16 for canon year ago. this lens offers excellent quality (sharpness, colors, very good mechanincs - built like a tank, fast) for reasonable price!

Hi Lars

I have the Tokina 11-16mm and it's highly recomendaly. Build like a tank. Clutch system. Nice contrast. Sharp. The micromoter is a bit noisy, but it doesn't have to work that much on a UW so it's acceptable. I'm using it at 16 mm on my Canon 5D FF and the full range on my 450D. and offcourse it's nice to have f2.8 in 11-16 mm.

If you used Canon you were welcome to try mine, but you are a Nikonian :-)

Jes

No, actually not. Just happened to buy Nikon as my first camera! :-) Actually never tried Canon! :-(
And now I have so much Nikon-equipment, that the question is settled....! :-)

And I did it the other way around :-)
anyway the Tokina is highquality - no doubt, but I have heard great things about Nikon UWs too :-)

I have a question about this lens. I am beginner on photography. I want to buy this lens but I am read lots of reviews. For example here http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1152/cat/33. Some people write that this lens is excellent and some bought lemon. The main problem with this lens is sharpness. I am from Slovakia and in our shops is not possible return lens to shop with problem of sharpness or with another problem with optical quality of lens.

I have question. I am a hobby photograph and when is lens not enough sharpness is it visible on image without crop of image or is it visible only on 100 % crop (zoom) on image. ?? Is it visible when I print photo 15x10 cm ? Because if it is visible only on 100 % crop it is not problem for me.

Thanks
Sorry for bad English.

I switched my previous Canon EF-S 10-22mm to the Tokina 11-16mm which is better in my opinion. More sharpness (Patrik > compare your own shots to full size samples here ), more versatility with the wider apperture (you can get background blurs even with an APSC sensor), build quality is impressive. On the down side, it's more sensitive to flare and purple fringing is sometimes hard to fix in a single RAW pass if you have very different light conditions in the frame.

Ken rockwell's probably the last place you'd want to get camera advice on though the tokina is one of the best and sharest lenses you can get on the crop cams.
I just sold one because I upgraded to a 21 zeiss.

The only contender for it is the 16-35 II and the zeiss, IMO

Thank you for your photos. I compare with my photos from Nikkor 18-105 and your are better than my. I think that Tokina is wery good choice.

I used Tokina 11-16 on my D80 and D300, it's a great lens, solid and optically perfect, great for architecture and landscape but i found it a litte wide especially for landscapes if you don't find the right angle barrel distortion is imminent, Sigma 10-20 is more suitable even though the apperture is not 2.8.

I'm currently getting to grips with a Tokina 11-16.
I get a strange ghost spot in the exact centre of the frame when I use this lens stopped down to f22 on long exposures. I'm not shooting directly into sunlight or anything.

I'm just experimenting with landscape photos at the moment.
Does anybody else have this experience with this lens??

Check the back element of the lens for a dust spot.

Thanks for the suggestion Clyde, but no dust. The lens is spotless.
I haven't figured this one out yet, unless I'm getting some form of reflection from between the front element and UV filter.

Do you close the viewfinder?

No, hadn't thought of this.
Can this have much an effect on long exposures?

yup. sure can. sometimes light penetrates from the viewfinder..

You learn something new every day...
Thanks Clyde, Michael & Adam

I have the 12-24, and I am very pleased with it. I have shot my best photos using that lens. If I have to choose now, I would go for the 11-16 mm. That was not available when I got my 12-24, but I have heard it is even sharper and one stop faster.

But, keep in mind, it has a zoom range so small that it's basically a prime.

And your point is????

That this newer lens may not serve the same function as the older in terms of zoom range...what did you think my point was??

I didn't know. That's why I asked :-)

Offcourse simple math shows a difference in zoomrange 6 vs 12 mm, but it still serve the function at a UW zoom the FOV changes a lot from 16 to 11 mm's but you're right you don't get the 17 - 24 mm. My experience is that I don't miss them. On my EOS 450D I allmost allways use it on 11 or 16 mm and changes to another lens if I need more mm. On my 5D I uses it as a 16 mm prime :-)

If it's only for lanscape pictures I would take the 12-24 since you don't need the f2.8 for lanscape pictures, but if you uses it indoor I would take the 11-16.

It's one of the sharpest "zoom" lenses for crop cameras and works well on a 5D2. Both images in my gallery were shot with it on a 50D and a 5D 2 and you cannot tell the difference in resolution.

On the 5D2 it severely gets chromatic noise in the corners but i crop them out. Nonetheless it works best on the 50D.

Karl, you're saying that this lens works on a full frame sensor camera from canon?

~Hi, I recently bough new sigma 10-20/3.5, and I think is very good as well. I decided for sigma for these reasons:
- bigger scale of focal points /10 vs 11 and 20 vs 16/
- I read that sigma is better in pictures taken against the sun, and had better contrast in it, also chromatic aberation is better tha tokina.

- maybe tokina has sharper borders on fast apertures, but I use fast apertures just in reportage photos, or snapshots, so I dont really care about softer borders.
- at slower aperture /landscapes, long exposure, or when is enough light/ is the same.

- I tried also tokina 11-16 but when you look through and zoom from 11 to 16, it's not really big change of angle of view, but mainly you'll be use like prime lens at 11, so it doesn't really care too much :)

~I think both of these lens are really great and I lovin' it to use them. bye

If I was you. I'd read the find print. The lens will not stand up in the elements. If it gets wet your lens and camera are screwed. IN the beginning a few cameras shorted out. This company had to put the fine print in and let everyone know its not weather proof. That means dust, sand mist dampness snow. in the end its your money

Hi, I bought Tokina 11-16mm. Can You give me advise, how to test it's sharpness ? I want to make sure if its not crippled one and where as well as how I can compare it ? I don't have tripod yet. Maybe I am just expecting too much from wide angle ? Thanks in advance

Hi guys,
when i see all this sharpness questioning I think we are discussing about the sex of angels.
Every manufacturer has some quality variation among its production, someone more than others, perhaps.
Threads about this or that lemon from canon, nikon , tokina, sigma are unsignificant.
I personally was always lucky and the three zooms I have (nikon 12-24, nikon 17-55 and sigma 50-150) are perfectly sharp for me; nevertheless I bought my lenses from a reputable dealer in my town, where I can return a lens if I am unhappy.
Remember, the pictorial result of a picture have little to do with sharpness alone.
Sharpness is the most important topic for those interested in brick wall photography.
Go out and take pictures, my friends! Guys involved in sharpness evaluation and sensor cleaning spend more time in technical troubleshooting than enjoy photography ...

Hi all, first comment from me. I had the Tokina 12-24 for some time when i had the Canon 350D and the 450D, then the Tokina started to not work, had it repaired and was relieved to be able to use it again then wheil at the coast one of my tripod legs melted into the sand when a small wave made the sand soft and the whole lot took a dip in the sea...cam and lens not longer works...since then i moved upto a Canon 50D and a few months later purchased the Tokina 11-16. The lens rocks, way much sharper then the Tokina 12-24 and like some have said your able to put filters on it which is great cause i'm able to use my great B&W 10x ND filter for my long exposuers...