Tokina 20-35mm F3.5-4.5 AF A-mount lens reviews

reviews found: 7   
reviewer#44069 date: May-26-2018
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 3
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.5
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:Tokina AF 20-35 F3.5-4.5 II
Minolta AF 20 F2.8 & RS
Minolta AF 24 F2.8
Minolta AF 28 F2.8
Minolta MC 35 F2.8
Vivitar 35 F2.8
Minolta AF 24-50 F4
Sony DT 16-50 F2.8 SSM
Sony DT 18-55 SAM I/II
Tamron 17-50 F2.8
Sony E 16-50 PZ
Sony E 18-55 OSS
Sony E 20 F2.8
Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6
price paid:74 USD (used)
positive:20 mm full-frame
negative:Lateral CA at wide end
Mild purple fringing
Low contrast
Mild to moderate barrel distortion
Lack of any sealing
Narrow zoom control and heavy action
72 mm filter size
Size and weight
Odd wide/shallow circular metal hood that is difficult to mount and store reversed.
comment:The seller listed this on eBay as being in good clean condition, but there was heavy fungus on an inner element lens element that ruined all images. The seller gave a substantial partial refund, so I took the rear elements out and did my best cleaning them. This improved the contrast greatly at 20 mm, but the previous II version was much sharper. Perhaps I messed up the reassembly. "JAPAN"

The zoom mechanism is somewhat complicated and feels quite heavy but works smoothly and fairly consistently. The front element moves forward and backward slightly with zoom reaching a minimum between 28 and 24 mm. The rear element sticks out at 20 mm and moves forward about an inch at 35 mm. The front element rotates and moves forward with closer focus.

The build feels substantial until you look closely. There are holes and gaps all over for dust and debris to enter the lens.

Even in its current condition this lens is sharper than my better copy of the Minolta AF 20mm F2.8 (RS). It is good enough on an APS-C camera that it could be used instead of an APS-C kit lens. Then again the 18-55 kit lens has better image quality with much greater reach in a smaller, lighter body.
reviewer#11965 date: Aug-30-2014
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 3.9
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 28-85 3.5/4.5
Sigma 24 2.8 "Superwide"
Sony 18-70
Sony 16-50 2.8
price paid:?? a loong time ago!
positive:Reasonably good performance and excellent build quality
negative:Filter ring rotates when focusing
I suspect there are better lenses out there
comment:This became my most frequently used lens when i acquired it in the late '80's. I was very pleased with the results it gave (on film of course, in those days) and continued to use it occasionally on film after I took up with digital in '07. I suspect most dyxum members would be interested in the performance of this lens on APS c but I've never even attached it to either my a100 or a77 (see my review of Sony 18-70).

I used to think this lens was big and heavy, but that was before the 16-50 2.8 came my way. This thing is like a feather in comparison!

I've been looking out for a reasonable priced used full frame DSLR for some time now and took the plunge recently. The fact that I already have a lens like this available makes full frame viable for me. Having tested it out today I would say it's on the good side of adequate, and I won't need to hurry to replace it (I have the focus speed set to slow just in case!).

Summing up. No need to seek this lens out (especially if you're on APS c). However, If you see one going cheap snap it up, and if someone sends you one for free in the post you'll be laughing!

Edit: 8 Months on from this review, the lens has still not found it's way onto my A77, but I have used it quite a lot on the A850 making long exposures with polarisers and ND filters. I'm generally pleased with the results. However, I'd still not wholeheartedly recommend it to others as the front element rotates when focussing and this is a nuisance when you have a polariser on and a filter holder. When set to MF the focus ring is loose and not positive in any way, making it easy to knock out of focus when adding a graduated filter, for example. This has resulted in a high percentage of unusable shots. If you're into this sort of technique or thinking about trying it out in future then you probably won't want make this lens your first choice. Having said that, I have had to make minimum corrections for distortion and I'm not actively seeking a replacement for it. I will be putting up with it's foibles for the time being.

You can see images I have made with this and my other reviewed lenses here https://www.flickr.com/photos/marti-thinkso/

Edited 17/4/17. Since the Minolta 20mm 2.8 arrived in my stable, this lens is likely to go to a new home as I only retained it following the acquisition of a 19-35mm Zoom due to the 72mm filter size.
reviewer#10918 date: Feb-14-2013
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta - AF 20 F2.8
price paid:$0.00
positive:Very sharp - but ONLY at 20mm setting
negative:Not sharp at any other setting than 20mm
comment:I owned a Minolta - AF 20 F2.8 prior to this lens. Then I literally found this lens as a bonus in a camera bag I bought - the bag was only to include a body and a 50mm prime - then whoa!

My copy of this lens is and was pristine, so I don't know if I just got a good unused copy by pure luck but - I did a multi shot comparison with my Minolta - AF 20 F2.8 and *at 20mm* this lens WON big time. Corners, contrast, color, everywhere. So I sold my Minolta - AF 20 F2.8 for big money and kept this free lens.

I *only shoot it at 20mm* - and it's my widest lens.

-S
reviewer#8797 date: Mar-17-2011
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 3
flare control: 4
overall: 3.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:
missing
price paid:20 USD
positive:Бюджетный широкий угол.
negative:Не высокая резкость на открытых.
comment:Достался с сильным софт-эффектом. Перебирал задний блок линз. http://photofile.ru/users/dimka69/200432248/
reviewer#5038 date: Mar-15-2009
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.2
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Canon 24-105mm
price paid:95USD
positive:Compact, well built, and reasonably sharp for the price
negative:None, for the price it makes a competent standby wide angle in the kit.
comment:This is a nice compact lens. The second generation 77mm is better but this one suits my purpose until I can find a 77mm.
reviewer#1457 date: Nov-21-2006
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:Minolta 24mm f/2.8
price paid:???
positive:good sharpness when stopped down
negative:some edge softness
not wide enough for digital
comment:Not up to the standards of my primes. I don't shoot a lot of wides but this lens is not wide enough for me now that I shoot with a 7D. If shooting digital find something wider. Color and flare control are fine in my view. Decent lens but nothing special
reviewer#1359 date: Oct-29-2006
sharpness: 3
color: 3
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 3
overall: 3.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Konica-Minolta 2.8-4/17-35, Minolta 2.8/20, Minolta 2.8/24
price paid:80 EUR (used)
positive:Quite good build quality (heavy!), compact size
negative:Soft images, warm colors
comment:The lens actually has a good reputation. Unfortunately, I can not reproduce the positive experiences of other users. The Konica-Minolta 2.8-4/17-35 is sharper over the whole zoom range, not to speak of wide angle primes. Thus, I don't use it anymore. However, one might consider carrying this lens as a weapon while photographing in hazardous environments. ;-)
reviews found: 7   

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 7
  • sharpness: 3.71
  • color: 3.86
  • build: 4.00
  • distortion: 3.86
  • flare control: 3.71
  • overall: 3.83

to add your review
you need to login

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania