Đánh giá tokina 11 16 f2 8 ii năm 2024

I have this lens since 10 years. Back then I was shooting on DX. The Lens behaved wonderfully. I felt in love so much with it that, after I have switsched to FX i still use it! Yes you can use the Tokia 11-16 as a 16mm Full frame lens. It's not necessarily too sharp but it's ok for wide angle photos. On my old D3s it behaves good. Sometimes it misses focus but ... it's on full frame! Check out some examples: Hochzeitsfotograf Fulda

reviewed April 29th, 2020 (purchased for $400)

• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by pberdeaux (1 reviews) Fast aperture/focus, great build quality, and smooth MF Minor CA and Flare This is one of the best ultra wide angle DT lens out here for your money. I've had this lens for about a year now with a Sony A77. It's a little soft around the edges at f2.8 but it does very well between f4-5.6, and is very sharp at f8-16. It has excellent bokeh and the auto-focus motor is quick and accurate. It is certainly not a Zeiss but for a forth the cost it's worth every penny! reviewed August 5th, 2014 (purchased for $350)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by hdhani (14 reviews) UWA with constant f2.8, build like a tank, image quality is surprisingly good, 77 mm filter thread Only for APS-C, one touch focus clutch mechanism this is an UWA built exclusively for APS-C camera body. Mount with FF body and heavy vignetting will occur. Tokina is wll-known for build quality which felt like a tank. It's the only UWA lens for APS-C with constant f2.8, which makes it a great low-light lens. One thing of note is that UWA is a specialized lens because it creates distorted perspectives on objects, hence it is a great lens for landscape and architectural photography. Sharpness is surprisingly great for a large aperture UWA. In conclusion, if you need large aperture UWA for APS-C body, this lens is for you reviewed March 26th, 2013 (purchased for $500)
• 8 out of 10 pointsand recommended by makcv113 (8 reviews) Fast aperture, fast focusing, tough build very short zoom range, flare I bought this lens because I wanted an UWA. I've had and owned a few UWA and have reviewed them on this website. But I never owned a fast UWA like this at f2.8, and I gotta say that it does make a difference. What I don't like about this lens is the short zoom range. I preferred the Sigma 10-20mm and Tokina 12-24mm because at their long end it's close to the full frame equivalent of 35mm which I used often. This lens is sharp when used at f8. I use f11 for landscapes. Highly recommended for low light/video shooting like how I did with this music video I shot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51nGTcTXC_Y Other lenses used for this video was a Canon 50mm 1.8 and 18-135mm 3.5-5.6. You can tell which shots were with the Tokina. Because of the 2.8 aperture, I was able to record more light thus the clip being brighter and was able to use the clips from the lens for the official mv. Visit my FB page to get updates on new videos and specific gear used so you know how it was shot http://www.facebook.com/MAVPMedia http://www.youtube.com/user/MAVPMedia Here are some photos taken with the Canon 40D: http://flic.kr/p/dzc4t1 http://flic.kr/p/dz6zSF http://flic.kr/p/dz6zTB http://flic.kr/p/dx7z5x http://flic.kr/p/dxd3fC reviewed October 21st, 2012 (purchased for $500)
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by shrikrishna (4 reviews) Colors, contrast, A+ build None Compared this lens with 14-24 Nikon, my copy is on-par with 14-24 minus AFS on a d300. For full frame, no-questions, 14-24 is the champion. DX users will get a great benefit from this lens (FX : 16mm) as this is lighter, fairly fast in focusing (mine has no motor), fantastic color rendition and super build quality. I like it, used it for many interior design shoots!. Fantastic lens from Tokina. reviewed May 28th, 2012
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by asulea (12 reviews) Build quality, f/2.8, image quality, very sharp No. Excellent lens. reviewed September 9th, 2011
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by lightknight (31 reviews) Wide, big aperture, solid and well built - pro standard some CA, small zoom range, flare It is hard to believe that this lens sells for the same price as a F4.5 10-20mm sigma here in New Zealand because in my mind its a no-contest. Sure it doesnt have the same factor 2 zoom range but who cares when its so sharp and fast? Down to specifics the IQ in the centre is very high at any setting. image corners are soft at F2.8 better at F4 and sharp sharp sharp beyond that. IQ generally seems better at 11 mm but there isnt much in it between that an 16mm. A bonus for me is that it works from 16-14mm on my D700 FX with some very slight corner shading at 14mm. No the corners are not sharp on an FX but its certainly handy to be able to use it in the right circumstances. Build quality is simply outstanding for the money. The zoom is well weighted and the focus ring feels slightly damped - its just right. No, its not quite at the standard of the 14-24 Nikkor but then it is only 40% of the price. The level of integration with the D7000 and d700 is great....for example use trhe push/pull manual focus ring and it disengages menu functions as it should. You might read here that it focuses slow. What? No way - its fast and just why do you need it to focus from 1m - infinity in 1/20 second instead of 1/10? Autofus is also reasonably quiet - but face it guys - who needs it when everything between 1m and infinity is in focus at 11 mm and F8....But if video is your thing then my advice is get and external mike. Yes the Samyang 14mm is possibly sharper (definitely on a FF) but then it is a prime and putting filters on is a no-no, and the Tokina goes to 11mm on a DX. You pay your money and take the choice. Conclusion? If you are interested in great IQ and a well-built piece of kit at an almost consumer price this is the ONLY option. But beware of flare! reviewed July 5th, 2011 (purchased for $690)
• 8 out of 10 pointsand recommended by mongoose31 (1 reviews) Build quality, color, sharpness I have had this lens for about one year and have used it on my 7D. It is a very good lens with good sharpness, color performance and fairly quick focusing. However, as I continue to migrate to full frame (I have a 5D also) I plan on selling it. I recently bought the Rokinon 14mm for Canon (same as Samyang 14mm). Wow, I have tested it against this Tokina at f stops 4, 5.6 and 8. I can tell you that at each stop the Rokinon was significantly sharper. As you stop down the difference is less but even at f/8 the Rokinon wins. I am not troubled by the lack of autofocus on the Rokinon as most of the time it is at infinity or the hyperfocal distance. I paid half of what I bought the Tokina for and now that money will go towards my next purchase (Canon 70-200mm f/4 IS). This is my first ever post so please excuse my simplicity. Forget the Tokina unless autofocus is absolutely critical for you or the 2.8 aperture. Thank you. reviewed December 24th, 2010 (purchased for $625)
• 7 out of 10 pointsand not recommended by dadgummit (6 reviews) F2.8 aperture, build quality Soft at F2.8, Slooooooooooow AF I purchased this UWA on the word of several glowing reviews. I just do not see it!! I purchased one copy that front focused close up and back focused far away pretty bad. I live 10 minutes from Tokina's American HQ so I drove it in. They re-chipped it and got it back to me 2 days later. It was ok but really soft until about f4. From f5.6 to about f8 it had absolutely fantastic sharpness BUT the reason I paid for this expensive lens with the tiny zoom range was for f2.8 so the lens went back to Tokina again. I brought my 50D body to show the differences which were very apparent even on the 3" screen of the camera. Tokina just replaced the lens with another copyand it was a little better yet but still VERY soft at f2.8. I finally sold it thinking why pay the steep premium for a lens that is not usable until f4 so I purchased the Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 which is now my favorite lens I own. It is sharp at f4 just like the tokina but it has FAST auto focus and a bigger range. To make it better it is about $250 cheaper. Now I do know that Tokina lenses are compatable with my camera body (just read my glowing review of the 10-17mm fisheye) but this one could not get it right and I was not willing to waste my time with a 4th copy of the same. reviewed August 5th, 2010 (purchased for $650)
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by abanerjee (2 reviews) wide, f2.8, study construction, sharp like a knife, color rendition limited zoom range You can get the Tokina if you're in the USA for $600 at Adorama.com, cheapest place I found it. I bought it from a local store, with tax, at $635. I was between the Tokina and the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 and the price difference of ~$120 really does make you think. But it is worth it. For me, the immediate advantage of being able to stop down does help tremendously. The Sigma is great for landscapes, but the Tokina's ability to go down to f2.8 makes it a much more flexible lens and is very helpful indoors. I also find that the color rendition and contrast created by the Tokina to be superior. reviewed March 31st, 2010 (purchased for $635)
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by radityopradipto (5 reviews) Excellent BQ, Absolutely Sharp, Absolutely a must-have for this price CA, easily suffer flare This is the best ultra wide I've tried so far For the Performance/Price, I'll give the rating 9.5/10 The build quality is superior to any ultra wide for APS-C sensor and the image quality is fantastic A MUST HAVE for any Landscape shooter --- see the result of this lens on http://radityopradipto.zenfolio.com reviewed November 18th, 2009 (purchased for $600)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by wingdo (5 reviews) Wonderful low light interior wide angle Soft at wide open especially at 11-14 I guess I got a good one first time out. If you shoot indoors and need a true wide angle for your DX, this is the lens to get. 1 stop faster than the Nikon and I like the color rendition better than the Sigma 10-20 which I used to have. A specialty lens, but it has Tokina's consistent Pro solid build and takes fantastic pictures. reviewed October 20th, 2009 (purchased for $550)
• 8 out of 10 pointsand recommended by PuxaVida (6 reviews) Fast, great BQ, good IQ CA, soft edges at wide open It's a fast lens with impressive IQ (both in center and edges). On a D90 especially at f/5.6 and even at f/8 I get great results. MF/AF clutch is very useful. BQ is very good. Some may say that AF is slower/noisier than nikons but you don't shoot a running cheetah with a wide angle lens and I think noise level is quite acceptable. Zoom range is between 11-16 unlike Sigma's or Nikon's in this category but I personally never complained about that. I gave 8 for IQ because this lens has high lateral CA levels and a bit soft in the edges at wide open. reviewed September 25th, 2009 (purchased for $650)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by RadiantLite (16 reviews) built quality, image quality, big aperture color fringing Tokina 11-16mm is the best super-wide angle lens up to date. The build quality of the lens is very good. The image quality is excellent in any aperture and focal length. Auto focus is fast and quiet. Unlike Canon EF-S which have a smaller aperture of f3.5-4.5, and also is not compatible with full frame body, Tokina 11-16mm have a constant aperture of f/2.8 and compatible with full frame body up to 15mm which is great. It is also slightly cheaper. The constant aperture of f/2.8 made this lens great for low light and also good enough to create shallow depth of field. The limitation of this lens will be the zoom length. 11-16mm definitely shorter than Canon EF-S 10-22mm, Sigma 10-20mm, Nikon 12-24mm, and ultra wide lens from Tamron. (Tokina is available for Nikon cameras as well). There is also no manual focus override, you need to push-pull the focus bar to change focusing mode. Overall this lens is great in super wide angle category. If you are in love with the ultra-wide coverage for landscape, architecture (outdoor and indoor), and some of photojournalistic work (close crowd shots), then this lens is a must have. Please check http://www.radiantlite.com/2009/01/tokina-at-x-116-11-16mm-f28-pro-dx-for.html for sample photos, video and more reviews reviewed June 13th, 2009 (purchased for $650)
• 1 out of 10 pointsand not recommended by valas (1 reviews) I got a lemon. Fortunately I could return. Terrible CA at any aperture, three branches outside my house would just be purple blobs. Moderately soft until stopped down to f/5.6. Back focus where 3ft becomes 7ft. Never buy this lens on eBay. Make sure you can return it if your copy is a lemon. reviewed April 20th, 2009 (purchased for $500)
• 8 out of 10 pointsand recommended by goldenpiggy (6 reviews) Third time's the charm. Now it's truly spectacular. It took 3 tries to get a good copy. UPDATE 3/12/09 Sun was out in force this morning so I took outdoor shots with the second copy of this lens (first one was very soft across all aperture and FL I exchanged it). It quickly became apparent that some of the glass was not ground properly on this one. In some parts of the image, the CA exhibited was truly atrocious (it was cyan color), far worse anything I've ever seen. CA was far beyond anything the D300 could correct. I don't even know if you can call it CA the lens behaved like a prism, splitting out cyan color. For $700, I said no way and took the lens back to the store. They gave me hell, saying there was nothing wrong with the lens. This time I brought my D300 and showed them picture after picture with CA visible on the tiny 3" LCD and fuzzy shots galore. They finally caved in and let me exchange for one last time, making a note so there'd be no more exchanges. This time I tested the lens right in front of the sales people. Difference was truly night and day. This third copy was spectacularly sharp even wide open. I saw no CA that I can detect zooming in (the D300 does a great job getting rid of CA if shooting in JPEG). I finally got a good copy that substantiates the good reviews all over the net. It's unfortunate that 2 out of 3 lens were unacceptable. I've never had any experience like this. I've never had to exchange any of my Nikon lens, which includes 18-135, two 18-200VR, 80-200 f/2.8D, 300mm f/4, and the 35mm f/1.8G DX. They just worked right straight out of their boxes. It would be unfair to rate the Tokina 11-16 poorly based on what were definitely two defective lens. I am extremely happy with the third one. It is supremely sharp even wide open. At at f/4 - f/8, the Tokina obliterated my (very sharp copies) 18-200VR. I would dare to say the 3rd Tokina is encroaching on sharpness territory of my 35mm f/1.8G DX, which is truly amazing. Thus, I am re-rating this lens' image quality to 10. Hopefully it was just my bad luck to get a couple from a bad batch. Nobody should have to go through 3 to find one good one on a $600+ lens. Sure hope Tokina gets their act together soon. I can't stress enough that if you're in the market for this particular lens, make sure you buy it from a place that will let you exchange. There's definitely QC issues going on here. Good luck to you and hope you find a sharp copy the first time around. Make sure you test the hell out of it. \==================================== ORIGINAL REPORT 3/10/09: After reading all the reviews I could find on the net, I decided to take a plunge. This lens is not cheap in Japan, where everything is overpriced. But it is readily available here, and the store allows exchange if I wasn't happy. Thank goodness for that exchange policy. The first copy was soft even in the center at all focal lengths and aperture. CA was good though, and corners wasn't far worse than center. I did my usual sharpness test by shooting a product packaging that was printed using an offset press via process color (halftoning). I picked a product packaging that has small black text on a light background. In process color, black text is usually printed in only black ink, so it is sharp and high contrast. The light background has halftoning. I get the lens as close to the packaging as possible, turn off auto ISO, use a tripod and remote release, and shoot at all apertures at 11mm and 16mm. On truly sharp lens, the black text is tack sharp, very high contrast, and is truly black. I can see the halftone patterns of the background right down to the well defined shape of the halftone cells (usuall hexagonal or octogonal). Sad to say, my 18-200 VR at 18mm wide open was significantly sharper than the Tokina. I was astounded. I own two 18-200 VR's (don't ask), and am lucky to have very sharp copies. I repeated my test a couple of times, and every time the Tokina would turn out low contrast, soft images. Only when I did auto focus adjustment on the D300 to +15 did it get significantly better. Now mind you, the lens was less than a foot away from the test target. Stopping down to f/4 helped, but not by much. I also noticed a speck and a very fine scratch on the lens front. That was enough to make me go exchange the lens. I could have exchanged it for the newer version of the Tokina 12-24 f/4, but decided to get a different copy of the 11-16. The 2nd 11-16 was significantly sharper, by a wide margin. Actually I only need to stop down to f/3.5 to get very good sharpness. But this second lens has much worse CA than the first. Even the built-in correction on D300 couldn't get rid of it all. Also, the 2nd copy was softer than the first in he corners (much sharper in the center). Needless to say, I'm a little disappointed with the IQ of the 11-16. Build quality is top notch, but contrast, sharpness, and CA are all below my expectation. I guess I was expecting this thing to blow away the 18-200 in terms of sharpness, which it didn't. There's just too much variance in these lenses. Maybe they're just cranking them out now and QC is a little lax. Well I'm not going to push my luck and exchange it again. I decided to keep the lens since the CA can be corrected. I don't want to spend so much on the Nikon 12-24, and I'm gun shy about Sigma and Tamron. But I second-guess myself whether I should have gotten the newest version of the Tokina 12-24 instead. I've owned only one Tokina before this (28-70 f/2.6-2.8). That one had backfocusing issue -- I never could get it to be tack sharp. I also owned a Sigma and Tamron, and the build quality on them were pretty shoddy. All my other lenses are Nikon. I hate to say it, but variation from lens to lens is much better controlled in Nikon lenses. What should you take away from all this? Buy from a place that you can return or exchange if the lens does not meet your expectation. I could have saved money buying from the States and shipping over to Japan, but the savings could vanish quickly if I had to mail the lens back a couple of times. reviewed March 10th, 2009 (purchased for $700)
• 6 out of 10 pointsand recommended by roaniecowpony (4 reviews) excellent color and contrast backfocused about 3 ft on a 7ft subject 3/10/09, I bought this last Friday and tested it over the weekend all at f2.8. Nikonians.org has a couple threads on this lens. I found it backfocused about 3ft behind a subject at 7ft. The images were pretty soft. Since I was testing on a D300 Nikon, I immediately went to the AF correction page of my camera menu and tried the extreme offsets for AF. The -20 setting showed a good improvement. Further testing showed that -15 was the correct offset for the AF on this lens. I did some comparisons of my pics to Ken Rockwell's examples and they are very similar after the D300's AF offset settings. However, I wanted a lens that I could use on my D50 (no AF correction feature) as well. I went back to the store and tried their other example...same issue. I called THK and they said bring it in. I took it to them yesterday 3/9/09. In a couple weeks I should have it back. My intent is to get rid of my Tamron 11-18mm if the Tokina performs well. The color and contrast is hands down much better on the Tokina than the Tamron, no question. Even though I could get good performance after my AF corrections, this lens and the other in the store, would produce unsharp pics if not for my D300's AF correction capability. Therefore, I would not recommend it to anyone without that camera feature until THK Tokina gets their production corrected. reviewed March 10th, 2009 (purchased for $569)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by clc (2 reviews) fast, sharp, bang for bucks limited zoom range, CA, APS-C only I was long on market for wide, fast and reliable lens. After browsing through tons of reviews and tests online, I choose this lens over Canon 10-22 and Sigma 10-20. Tokina fit to my requirements for aperture, build quality and price. As there was hard to get one in our country for physical test I ordered it online - so it was shooting in the dark, but actually this is the best wide zoom lens I ever have owned so far and it was single penny worth. I had used it on Canon 450D body in different hard conditions (+40/-30) and it never failed. Comparing to Canon 10-22 it is faster, sharper and has better build quality. Canon better handles CA and has wider zoom range. But I will stay with Tokina... reviewed January 1st, 2009 (purchased for $569)
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by Renato (5 reviews) The BEST Lens I have ever used none, I wish I had this lens sooner You could definitely spend a lot more money on similar lenses from Nikon or Canon, but you would not gain anything at all as far as image quality, sharpness, boke` and even build quality. I do not believe there is, at the moment, a better or smarter lens. and do not forget it's a constant 2.8 and has 9 blades diaphragm... for photojournalists this is a must BUY IT!!! reviewed January 1st, 2009 (purchased for $500)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by Maxmad (1 reviews) Sharpness, contrast, build quality, fast aperture chromatic aberration I'm currently shooting with a Canon EOS 40d with the following lenses: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM Canon EF 70-200/4 L IS USM I have owned and used, but later sold, also the following lenses with the EOS 40d: Canon EF 50/1.4 USM Canon EF 17-40/4 L USM Sigma 30/1.4 HSM I needed a true wide-angle alternative to my APS-C sensor camera and I was contemplating whether to buy the Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM, the Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 HSM or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX. After reading a bunch of reviews, pixel-peeping hundreds of images at 100% magnification and finally handling the lenses in a camera store I finally decide to go with the Tokina option. The deciding factor was the vastly superior build quality, the fast aperture and the very nice smooth handling of moth zoom, focus and AF/MF switch. Even though it had been highly rated in various revviews I was prepared to see compromises in the sharpness/vignetting and distortion at the wider end and at maximum aperture. Well, to my surprise the lens has proven itself to perform absolutely briliantly, even wide open at 11 mm! Stopped down to f 8 it is tack sharp even in the extreme corners. Sharpness and contrast are at least as good as my other current Canon's, the 17-55/2.8 and the 70-200/4L, which BTW are VERY sharp indeed. The only weakness of the lens is chromatic aberrations, especially at the wider settings and at max aperture. However, since both RAW converters I employ, Canon's DPP and Adobe's Camera raw, have excellent correction for CA it's not a problem when shooting RAW, which is what I do 100% of the time. It would of course have been nice with an ultrasonic motor drive, but on such a wide-angled lens the throw of the focusing mechanism is so short, end the micromotor in the Tokina is actually reasonably quiet anyway, so it's really a minor issue. Warmly recommended! -Max reviewed October 31st, 2008 (purchased for $650)
• 10 out of 10 pointsand recommended by spuelijah (9 reviews) fast focus, sharp, relatively low distortion for an ultra-wide, 2.8, inexpensive moderate CA, limited zoom range This lens is fast to focus and inexpensive for a 2.8. It does suffer a bit with CA, but its better than its predecessor the Tokina 12-24mm. Distortion is nothing out of the ordinary for an ultra wide lens and is a lot better controlled compared to the Sigma 10-20mm. Zoom range is limited, but I find that to be its only major weakness. reviewed July 20th, 2008 (purchased for $600)
• 9 out of 10 pointsand recommended by Gandalf (8 reviews) Sharp from f. 2,8. see the review Have shot with this lens 2 days now. My findings: Sharp allready from f. 2.8. Sharper than Nikon 12-24 (from f.4 and down in the area 12-16), but Nikon 12-24 is more versatile - goes to 24mm and here - at 24 mm - the Nikon 12-24 shines. As sharp in the center as the new Nikon 14-24 allready from f. 2.8, but not in the corners - the Nikon14-24 is a clear winner here. Flare/ghosting: Worse than Nikon 12-24, but better than Nikon 14-24. About the same, maybe less CA, than Nikon 12-24. --- Today I suddenly could not get AF, whatever - turning of and on, but then took the lens off and mounted it again, and then the AF was OK again. I have experienced that with one or two Nikon lenses, too, when the lenses was new, and I hope it is the same: