Tokina 28-70mm F2.6-2.8 AT-X 270 PRO AF A-mount lens reviews
 Keber#26576 date: May-5-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 (kit) Sony 18-250 Sony 50 f1.8 Sony 75-300 |
| price paid: | £130 |
| positive: | Great manual focus Nice Bokeh Quick autofocus Very sharp (from f4.0) Fantastic build No distortion on APS-C |
| negative: | Heavy A little soft @ 2.8 Loud autofocus Focus clutch is a faff |
| comment: | I love this lens. It is soft but usable @ f2.8 this is hardly noticeable at f3.5 and it is sharp as a razor by f4.0. The AF is loud and not just a little, but it is fast and accurate (No adjustment required on my A77ii), the manual focus is a joy, it's smooth with a short throw and no backlash or flex, the focus ring is large with a good grip and has a nice quality damping as too does the zoom ring. It is heavy if this puts you off, don't go near it, but I personally like it as it helps to keep a steady shot and balances well with an A77ii. It is also great that there is no extension or rotation from the zoom or AF so you can put it down on a flat surface to shoot. I love the manual focus but the focus clutch can be a pain as the focus ring must be lined up with actual focus position, that is OK when the camera is off as it is always at infinity but you have to hunt blindly for it if the camera is turned on. If you can find a good example of this lens it is a real joy and the results are amazing. |
; 12MP| arrow34#12084 date: Jan-9-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minotla 28 f2 Minolta 17-35 Minolta 24-50 f4 Minolta 50mm f1.4 Rokinon 35mm f1.4 |
| price paid: | 265 (used mint) |
| positive: | Good range on a full frame camera. autofocus is pretty good on an A99 Pretty sharp even at f2.8, better is stopped down to f4. Balance is pretty good on an A99, but still heavy. Build quality is REALLY good. As other reviewers have mentioned, love hate relationship with the clutch push pull focus. |
| negative: | Heavy Real hood hard to find, using a cheap petal hood that works ok Not as sharp at 2.8 as I would like, but the price speaks for itself. |
| comment: | I really like this lens and I used it A LOT on a recent trip. It was on my camera more than any other lens. There is a lot of confusion on the different models of this lens. I also have the pro II version, it is labelled 2.6-2.8, I only get 2.8. It also shows up in EXIF data as a totally different lens from lightroom. But overall a great buy for the money. I was glad I chose it, wish I could afford a zeiss lens.... but I blew my budget on a used a99. |
| thornburg#11894 date: Jul-7-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma EX DG 28-70/2.8 Minolta AF 24-85/3.5-4.5 Minolta AF 28/2.8 Minolta AF 50/1.7 Various other zooms & prime lenses |
| price paid: | 200 USD (used) |
| positive: | Built like a tank Good AF Sharpness Fast Aperture Price Focus Clutch |
| negative: | Size/Weight Focus Clutch Confusion over different versions |
| comment: | I have the so-called "Pro II" version. There are at least 5 different versions of this lens, not even counting the non-Pro. If you read through the reviews listed on this site for the Pro and Pro SV, it's clear at least some people with the SV left their review under the non-SV listing, and at least some people with the non-SV left their rating under the SV version. I haven't used the SV version, but SV stands for "Super Value", and it is reported that they used cheaper glass in the SV version, resulting in minor differences in color, flare, etc. You can identify the one I have by the following traits: 1) It's labeled f/2.6-2.8 2) It has a focus clutch 3) It has a bayonet mount hood 4) It says "Pro" but doesn't say "SV" About the focus clutch: I have a love-hate relationship with the focus clutch. The focus clutch allows the lens to have both fast AF and wonderful feel to the manual focus, but you have to switch both the lens and camera between MF and AF. If you put the camera in MF and the lens in AF, you can't focus. If you put the camera in AF and the lens in MF, your focus will be really slow, and you may be putting excess strain on the focus motor in the camera. The clutch can only be operated when the focus grip is all the way at the end. For a zoom, this lens is quite sharp. The short end is as good as most 28mm prime lenses. The long end is a little softer, especially wide open, but stopping down even a hair produces plenty of sharpness. Images are usable wide open, even at the long end. The color isn't quite up to the top standards, but I find it pleasing and accurate. Perhaps slightly less vibrant than the good Minolta AF lenses. I don't have the original hood, which is reportedly useless. I bought a third-party reversible 77mm plastic petal hood on eBay, and have been quite pleased with it. Compared to the Sigma EX DG 28-70/2.8, this lens is quite a bit better. It's sharper, has faster AF, and better color. |
| wetapunga#11889 date: Jul-3-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ16-80 Minolta 35-70/4 Sigma 24/1.8 Minolta 28/2.0 |
| price paid: | NZ 500 (Used) |
| positive: | Bright aperture Build |
| negative: | Sharpness Weight |
| comment: | I wanted to like this lens. It is an engineering delight. The build is as many have pointed out, amazing. It focuses swiftly and the bright aperture with large manual focus ring makes it a joy to use. While I have ranked the colour as 4, this is a little harsh. Nonetheless, it lies between the insipid colours of the older generation Sigma lenses, and the magical colours of the Minolta. Some distortion occurs at the wide and long end. But that is a common trait of zoom lenses of this ilk. So again, not something that should bother anyone really. Nonetheless, I ended up unhappy with this lens for two reasons. First, the weight. That's a peculiarity of me doing a fair bit of traveling and liking a lens in this range to weigh less. That won't be a consideration for all. Where I think it fell down, was on the promised sharpness. Sure, I appreciate it isn't as sharp wide open and needs to be stopped down 1 or 2 times. So the 4 score reflects that consideration. And I appreciate it isn't as 'contrasty' as modern lenses like the Carl-Zeiss set. Again, a bit of boosting there in processing can alleviate that. The problem really is its sharpness, even when you do the corrections, isn't on par with what a '5' merits. In optimal conditions, it works. No complaints. But when conditions start to get duller its performance just drops faster than I expect a sharp lens to do. If it was sharper wide open, I'd give it a 4.5. I could see it being useful for users who have a lot more control over lighting. But I think I'm more of a prime guy. |
| 3.0#10382 date: Jul-15-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 28-105mm Minolta 50mm Sony 18-55mm |
| price paid: | 320CAD Used |
| positive: | Strong Build Sharpness Large Manual Focus Ring Hard focus stop Colors |
| negative: | Weight is positive and negative. Negative being it throws my a77 and a200 off unless I have vertical grip, otherwise I really do enjoy the weight. |
| comment: | I read about the legendary lens here and found the Pro II on eBay in Japan. I had the option of the Pro or Pro II for same price, but decided to go with the Pro II since it has more advanced glare coating. I did quite a bit of research into the lineage of the lenses as I was pretty back and forth with both versions. I'm literally taken back by how sharp the lens is, stopping down from 2.8 to 4 and manual focusing gets you images razor sharp. The build is absolutely incredible, it's some type of alloy composite and feels like it can take a beating. Mine is near perfect condition and that is a testament to the build, considering the age I'm sure this lens has been through a lot and it's still held. I'm definitely saving up to get the original Pro version with the short hood mount. Not that I think it's better than the Pro II but simply to complete the set. This is the 3rd Tokina lens I own the other two, 70-210 and 75-300mm are built from steal and feels solid and sharp in their own right. But nothing compares to this lens. |
| lifeispixels#9970 date: Feb-24-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 2 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 28-75 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 300 (used) |
| positive: | Beautiful colors Respectfully sharp Built like tank! |
| negative: | Flare can be so bad. Heavy. Tokina's usual CA |
| comment: | Reading so much hype about this lens as an incarnation of Angenieux, I bought a used one to try. There are many versions of this lens and I knew I had to look for the original PRO version with a short round hood and satin finish as it's said to have the optical formula of Angenieux. First impression with this lens was very good. It's respectfully sharp. It appears soft at f2.6 or f2.8 (depending on your version if it's local Japanese or exported) however the details are all there. Contrast was low wide open so post processing if necessary. Now what's not so good about it. Because of its constant aperture, it's meant to be used in low light. And out on the streets with low light, you can expect all kinds of light sources, many of them pointing directly at the lens. And this is when it turns ugly. The flare is very strong. One of the lens that gives strongest flair I have experienced. One particular image on the street where a spot light was seen, the flare blew images white and smeared all the details, rendering that image useless. However every lens has limitation and if you work with this in mind, you can find this lens a delight to use. Built quality is uber impressive. The best you can find and so it's not difficult to find a used one that appears mint because it's so well built and resistant to wear. However it's quite heavy and you will notice immediately when hung around your neck. On A850, it still balanced well but on lighter bodies like A55, the weight will tip the camera down and doesn't feel balanced in your hands when taking picture which could lead to hands strain. However the reason I kept Tokina 28-70 for 1 day and returned was the Japanese seller whom I bought the lens hid the fact that there was some fine fungus inside. So be careful when buying this lens since the outside mint appearance might mislead you to believe that this lens is well cared however there could be fungus, haze inside the optical elements already. After I returned it, I got myself a used (but latest version) Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and I never look back. The Tamron is optically much better in every regard. Colors rendition however is different and subjective. The Tamron is eye bleeding sharp right from f2.8 (make sure you micro adjust the lens since it seems to back/front a lot). I took the Tamron and went back to the same place where I tested the lens with street's spot light. The Tamron did many times better to control flare and all the details in the picture were kept well. Although Tamron's build quality is nothing special to be desired, it's good enough and on par with currently available lens in the market. The advantage is however a much lighter weight. So it's no longer a pain to carry around with A850 like it used to with Tokina 28-70. Control of CA is better with the Tamron and focusing speed is also noticeably faster. In summary, this lens is great if you could find one in good shape for around 200 USD. The price has been inflated recently (because of the saying it's Angenieux incarnation) to the point that it's being absurd. For 300+ USD, it's much wiser to look for the new/used Tamron 28-75 f2.8 which in many areas, can even beat the Carl Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 ZA. See my photos with Tokina AT-X 270 PRO 28-70 f2.6-2.8 and Tamron 28-75 f2.8 at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeispixels/collections/72157628204412995/ |
| Cloneranger#9796 date: Jan-17-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 234 USD |
| positive: | Well built, heavy lens with great glass. sharp! |
| negative: | Slight flare when shooting toward the sun but nothing that can't be corrected in PS. |
| comment: | This is one of my favorites. I'm never disappointed with the results when using this lens. I must have an exceptional copy because it is sharp from 2.6. I will try to post a B&W photo taken fall in the forum samples and you can judge for yourself. |
| thunkpad#9250 date: Jul-23-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 230 GBP used |
| positive: | - Very, very solid - Very sharp from f/4 - Excellent value |
| negative: | - Soft at f/2.8 - Some flaring |
| comment: | I've used this on several weddings as my main standard zoom and I can say it certainly holds up well for a lens that costs well less than half the equivalent Sigma and less than a fifth of the Carl Zeiss equivalent. At f/2.8 it clearly doesn't perform as well as these two lenses, with images decidedly soft - although that's not always a massive issue when shooting portraits. I tend to shoot from f/3.5 for this reason - but 2.8 is there if you need it. From f/4 it'll compete well with the Sigma and Carl Zeiss and from f/8 you'll be wondering why anyone would pay more. Flare has only really presented itself as an issue a couple of times but will show up if you start pointing it directly at the sun. As others have noted, it's built like a tank so no issue with build quality. A real gem if you can find one and great to have while you save up forthat Zeiss! |
| derekw#8695 date: Feb-24-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron SP 28-105 f2.8 Minolta 28-135 f4-4.5 |
| price paid: | 150 GBp new |
| positive: | Sharpness Beautifully built Overall IQ |
| negative: | Disappointing at f2.8 |
| comment: | Forget the f2.8, this lens is very good, but the Minolta blows it out of the water at anything above f4. But the Minolta cost a lot more. |
| andrewlamwc#8594 date: Jan-30-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG HSM Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 |
| price paid: | 205 USD (used) |
| positive: | Rich color like Minolta Lens Metal Build Fast focus |
| negative: | Soft open not wide enough Flare |
| comment: | Just go this lens for weeks and I put it with my A850 for some events. Good in color and focusing speed. Distortion and soft in wide end. Not better than than my 28-135. |
| GeirJ#8483 date: Jan-5-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 2.8/28-75 SAM SAL 2875 |
| price paid: | 500 USD (new) |
| positive: | Built like the proverbial tank Will withstand a lot of abuse |
| negative: | Soft wide open and at 70mm Flare |
| comment: | I bought this lens new back in the nineties and used it on the 9xi and was very happy with it. Last year I bought an a850 and used it as a standard zoom for a while, but it just was not good enough for this camera, so I bought the 28-75mm SAM which is a much better lens |
| marathonianbull#7971 date: Sep-15-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony CZ 16-80mm Sony 16-105mm --- (also) Sony 50mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2.8 M Minolta 50mm f/1.7, 70-210mm f/4 |
| price paid: | 800 CAD (Like New) |
| positive: | A HUGELY POSITIVE SURPRISE! Sharpness to the roof, as good if not better than any Minolta/Sony prime *AND* NOT "too soft wide open"; rich colors, somewhat similar to those of the 16-105mm (a lens with warm saturated colors, which almost put to shame the neutral tones of its sibling the Sony CZ 16-80mm); compared to these newer zooms, the classic Tokina AT-X 270 PRO F2.6-2.8 is faster & more luminous; my copy is also quite reliable AF wise, even in harsher dim conditions (given a little help from ISO 400+); and, indeed, it is sturdy.. like a tank; I do enjoy using its subtle Manual / Automatic Focus clutch, for it is easy to operate; in fact, the whole experience is so much FUN thanks to an overall PRO feeling & some gorgeous results!!! |
| negative: | Heavier than the Minolta Beercan (I do not mind at all to carry such a legendary ANGENIEUX DESIGN in my hands at last, for such a small price!) *NOTE: Flare control isn't worse than with newer lenses. |
| comment: | *** Please don't get confused here: we're talking about the original Pro version, which is the most sought after by those in the know as being the only Tokina Pro lens based on the legendary Angenieux optical formula (can easily be recognized by its weird short screw-on hood; see pictures and discussion for differentiation at: http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/2009/11/tokina-at-x-pro-28-70mm-f26-28.html ). *** On my Sony A700, this rather rare TOKINA AT-X 270 PRO "1" AF 28-70 F2.6-2.8 has quickly become my all-time favourite Alpha-mount lens as an enthusiast photographer. FYI, my second pick in this lower price range would be the Minolta/Sony 100mm F2.8 macro, closely followed in thrid by the fast Minolta/Sony 50mm F1.4. I won't compare it yet to Sony's renowned flagship products, namely the SONY G or Carl Zeiss lenses, but let's just say that my craving for a pricey Zeiss zoom has 'almost' vanished... |
| 5thElefant#7317 date: Apr-19-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 28-75 f2.8 |
| price paid: | L120 (as new) |
| positive: | Build Colours |
| negative: | Long MFD |
| comment: | Sharp-ish wide open at 28mm, sharp wide open at 70mm. Sharpens up nicely around f4 at any FL. Nice colours (seems to be a Tokina feature). Nice solid feel about it. Oddly the lens doesn't cope will with a target moving towards you using CAF. Focus accuracy is good on static targets so I guess it's just slow to focus. All Tokinas appear to have the same lens ID which could be a problem if you need different microadjusts. |
| lingoting#6621 date: Dec-22-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50mm XD DII |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Very very solid built Very sharp even at f/2.8 pretty fast focusing |
| negative: | not wide enough |
| comment: | If you can still find one, go for it. |
| DynarX64#6035 date: Sep-12-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | -Original Tokina AT-X 270 AF (72mm) |
| price paid: | 280 U$ |
| positive: | -Well built. -F2.8 (I don't mind 2.6) -Well ergonomic design when in use. -Hood attaching make lens become more pro. |
| negative: | -Crap design AF-MF clutch mechanism. -Less performance than the Original AT-X270 AF (72 thread version). -Skin of 'Pro I' and 'Original' are OK but this sand-like coating on 'Pro II' is easily to be peeling. |
| comment: | I've used the Original version of AT-X 270 AF family for very long time from film era to DSLR era. It perform very well even at 2.8 is a bit like a soft filter on the lens automatically. But for Pro II version (as same as Pro I but differences is very little things unaffected to the image.), it is very sucks (I gave 3.5 sharpness for this lens and 5 for original version). It recover from softness at F8, or may be I have a bad copy. I did comparation between Original one and this one. here is the link (not a standard testing but can tell you something no more no less). http://www.photohobby.net/webboard/detail.php?topicid=17054 Sorry for available only in my language. please know that upper image is from Original and lower from Pro II. ===================== Update .... My review here, http://www.fotorelax.com/forum/index.php?topic=8748.0 Let it VS the Tokina 28-80 / 2.8 head to head !! |
| jakoblochowich#5502 date: Jun-5-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony kit linse 18-70 Sony 16 2,8 fish-eye Sigma 30 1,4 Tamron 90 2,8 macro |
| price paid: | 300€ (used) |
| positive: | fantastic old-school heavy build metal and glas - nothing else colors are great "warm" light sharp for a zoom fast for a zoom preforms quite well at low light conditions fast and good AF |
| negative: | a bit soft towards 70 at 2,8 - but it's solved at 3,5-4 weight - if that's a problem - but this is not a plastic lense! |
| comment: | I bought this lens two weeks ago and it has been on my camera since. I have been looking for a fast quality zoom lens since I bought my A300 because I wasn't satisfied with the kit lens. Until now I have only used primes, but when I found this used zoom I was not in doubt that this should be the one. And I have not been disappointed! I really enjoy using this lens. I mostly do portraits and street shots and for that purpose it is fantastic. It's a quite heavy lens, but that's the price you pay for a solid build of metal and glass. After all I see that as a positive thing and it's a true joy to handle old-school quality like this. The only "soft spot" this tank has is, that it gets a little soft towards 70 at 2,8 but I actually find the softness quite charming combined with the warm light and great colors. Going down to 3,5 or 4 this "problem" seems to be solved! Apart from that I think I get almost as sharp pictures as with my primes and it preforms almost as well in low light conditions too. The AF is fast and works fine on my A300. All in all: if you come across this lens, don't hesitate to bye it. You'll not regret it! |
| turpentine#4888 date: Feb-22-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 50mm/1.7 18-70mm sony kit minolta 35-70mm/3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | $285 LN w/ filter |
| positive: | all metal solid build. fast AF. reasonable bokeh sharp from 3.5 on |
| negative: | soft at 2.8, not an annoying soft, like an angelic soft. big filter I guess, not really an issue for me. |
| comment: | I just got this lens and really enjoy it. Usably sharp wide open but great stopped down just a bit. I prefer the build over the sigma/tamron alternatives a great deal. This lens is just something that needs to be felt. It is good having so much metal in your hands. From some test I cannot see any bf/ff issues on my a200. The focus is fast when the mf ring is disengaged. The manual focus ring is metal as well so it carries a lot of weight when it turns. I like all the very pro touches to this lens at a very non-pro price. This lens can be a bit hard to find but is definitely worth the cost if you are not looking to pay the $1700 for the CZ or Minolta G. |
| lingoting#4559 date: Dec-17-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50 Minolta 50mm f/1.7 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Well built, good image quality and affordable. Focusing is very fast. |
| negative: | a little soft wide open @ 70mm |
| comment: | Definitely one of the best lenses I have used. I think it is doing a very good job for its price. Bought it for US$230, in superb condition. I am happy with it, works very well with my brand new A900 |
| charlemeign#2119 date: Apr-7-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 70-210 f/4 Minolta 50mm 1.7 Minolta 28-135 f/4-4.5 Minolta 24mm 2.8 Tamron SP 35-105 2.8 Sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | 275 USD used |
| positive: | Sharp Fast Heavy/Well Built |
| negative: | Backfocus/won't work with digital |
| comment: | I ordered this lens off Ebay after reading some reviews on here. The one I received was in perfect condition. It even had the original plastic wrapping inside. When I first tried it, I thought it gave perfect shots. When I examined some shots I took at 2.8, however, I discovered the camera was backfocusing. I tried it on my 5D, a 7D, and an Alpha. On all three I had the same results. I sent it to Tokina hoping it was something they could repair. They told me this lens was designed for 35mm film cameras only, and it was not supported for digital use. As such, there was nothing they could do. It worked perfectly on my 800si, but I really don't shoot film much anymore. Otherwise this lens would have been a keeper. |
| Maffe#1780 date: Feb-7-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 28-75/2.8 28-70G |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Buil, MF-focus ring is exelent, AF-speed |
| negative: | Soft wide open, minimun focus distance |
| comment: | Tested this one, KM 28-75 and Minolta 28-70G. Build is great, image quality really good when stoped down, really soft wide open (not necessary a bad thing) This is a heavy lens, I like that. The KM28-75 is the best alround of the 3, fast AF, light (at cost of build) good close focus. |
| ikephoto#1618 date: Jan-6-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | KM 17-70 Kit lens Minolta 50mm 1.7 |
| price paid: | 400 EUR |
| positive: | - Built like a tank, and very professional looking - Great handling - Excellent sharpness - Doesn't extend/rotate when focusing/zooming - Constant aperture (and it's a 2.8!) |
| negative: | - Soft at 2.8 (still usable) - Big and heavy - AF/MF clutch very stiff (in my case) - Have to take care of flare - Lens cap is useless with hood on (should buy a new "pinch-type" cap) |
| comment: | This lens is a big piece. Handles very well, it is very luminous, and produces very sharp pics from f4 onwards. The range on a 5D is about 42-110, which makes an excellent portrait lens. It's tough and sturdy, but has a very nice feel. A real pro lens. |
| barri#1335 date: Oct-17-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 1.4/50 2.8/100 Macro |
| price paid: | 350 Euro (new) |
| positive: | very sharp for a zoom. no back/front focussing issues |
| negative: | a little soft wide open, but still usable. a bit heavy. Shows a little bit of CA. |
| comment: | This is an excellent lens. nearly as sharp as my prime lenses, and can even be used wide open. super build quality. Highly recommended. |
| jeep#1244 date: Sep-26-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24-85 mm circular aperature 17-40 mm Canon L |
| price paid: | Ł330 (new) |
| positive: | Built like a Tank |
| negative: | In my opinion not a great performer. Hopeless close focus. Flare prone. Cold |
| comment: | Based on a Angenieux design, interestingly the Angenieux version has a better MTF rating on Photodo than the Tokina. Stopped down it's OK but not great, high CAs also at some focal lengths. A cold lens also. Hopeless close focus. Quite frankly my Minolta 24-85 mm is a better performer and scores an MTF rating of 3.5, against the Tokina's 3.2. Update: Tried on a900 also. Can produce good results but is out-classed in flare and close-focus ability. |
| jimbo#1160 date: Sep-4-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina AT-X 280 Pro Minolta 24-85mm |
| price paid: | Ł110 (new) |
| positive: | Cheap (for me!) Best built 3rd party lens (and better than most OEM) Fast |
| negative: | Heavy 2nd worst hood ever (only 28/2.8 is worse) Bit soft wide open |
| comment: | Well, I thought the AT-X 280 was the best handling AF lens until I bought this. Same wonderful smooth action to the focus and zoom rings, (like an old MF lens) but all metal and a nicer smooth paint finish. Couple of minor issues though: you can only engage the MF clutch in one position, and no focus scale in AF. (both fixed in the 280) Performance is pretty good too, it is a little soft wide open, but it depends what you shoot as to whether this is a problem. I've only shot wide open to test, never in a 'real' situation, though I quite like the bokeh wide open, so perhaps I will use it more often now. As you stop down sharpness improves noticeably. Not much flare resistance and the hood won't help either as it is only a couple of cm deep! If you can find one at this price you can't go wrong. It's not perfect, but it will outperform any cheap zoom and run its direct rivals pretty close. After all, Tokina bought the design for this from Angenieux, don't you know? |
| Callam9774#1124 date: Aug-27-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70 Kit Lens. Friend's Nikon AF-S 17-55 f2.8 G (L1000) worth. Tokina was certainly better made and just as fast. |
| price paid: | L149 |
| positive: | Superb build quality and hence pride of ownership.Stunning improvemnent over kit lens.Develops muscles in left arm.F2.6/2.8 allows much more control and versatility. Increases excitement at taking photos.At its best using A55 balancing weight of lens. AF of A55 matches sharpness of lens. |
| negative: | A bit of a macho lens. Not recommended if carrying heavy equipment is a problem. |
| comment: | I was a little underwhelmed by my 5D using the kit lens and a shade concerned that my previous bridge-camera took photos that were nearly as good... until I bought the Tokina. The quality of my photos seem to have increased in proportion to the extra weight. |
| tankm#1023 date: Jul-16-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-75 f2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Build. AF/MF clutch. |
| negative: | Heavy. Minimum focus distance of 700mm compare to Minolta 330mm. Sharpnest wide open (f2.8) is mixed. Flare easily. |
| comment: | f2.6 not usable on the KM5D (not really important). Sharpnest at wide open (F2.8) is mixed, better at the wide side, and become soft around 60mm onward. Stepping down to f3.5-4 helps to regain the sharpnest at the long end. Only thing I really missed from the Tokina is the AF/MF clutch mechanism. When set at AF, the lens can be held anywhere without worry of gripping the AF ring. When set to MF, it provides a big grip, easier to MF. Have to watch out for flare causing situation. Side strong light can cause flare on this lens. |
| Anssisa#744 date: May-3-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Km 18-70 3.5-4.5 Kitlens 50mm Prime |
| price paid: | 299€ (Used) |
| positive: | -Sharp for a zoom -AF/MF clutch + MF ring -Robust, realy heavy build quality -Internal focusing -Smooth zoom and focus Fast AF |
| negative: | -Lenscap -Weight? Doesn't bother me.. |
| comment: | This is my first tokina lens, and i am happy to say, all positive things i read about this lens, here att dyxum and from other forums, they were true. It is really built like a tank. I do not mind the weight, because every moving part in this lens work smooth. It is internal focusing and internal zooming, the outer dimensions stay the same whatever you do. The AF/MF clutch is a nice feature, even tough not as good as on newer tokinas or sigmas. You can only push or pull from a few focus locations, not all as with the never versions. You push it forward and it releases the ring from MF. So when you use AF it does not rotate and you can support your lens with your whole hand. When its pushed back against the body, its starts rotating when used on AF, so you got to switch AF to MF from the body. The 7D has it easier becuse it has a AF/MF button under the right thumb. But its no problem with the 5D either. The pictures taken with this lens are sharp. Stopped down they are extremely sharp. Some say that its soft or too soft at wide open, might be a tad soft but very usable if nothing else. Depends on what to compare with. Its sharp enough for me in anycase. The lenscap that came with my lens is horrible. You cant even think of using it at the same time as the lenshood. But to protect the lens, it works just fine. Otherwise i have no complaints so far. I gave all fives for this lens, but not for the sharpnes. The sharpness is great but as it is not as good as a 50mm primer (whitch i didnt expect it to be) it gets a 4.5. /edit/ I will not lower the buildquality from 5, but as the clutch can be better, it should be 4.5 as with the sharpness. |
| waveneyman#450 date: Jan-27-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Astonishingly sharp Build Focus clutch |
| negative: | Weight(not really) Focal range(?) |
| comment: | Did I mention this lens is sharp - you better believe it, so much so it rivals a prime. The weight tho' considerable is also an advantage if build quality is taken into account. This lens will last and last and gives you great confidence. To nit-pick, it would be an unbelievable lens if the range was 24-105. At todays prices it's a steal. |
| alex66#277 date: Dec-13-2005 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp, very sharp, fast, excellent build, |
| negative: | Weight? |
| comment: | Bought for a song used, the images are superb, the af selection is a nice feature, so well built it feels like you could hammer nails with it. I bought it to go with a 5d and as a low light combination superb. I second that if you see one for a good price buy!! |
| jrfarrar#107 date: Sep-10-2005 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Built like a tank nice af/mf clutch system focus smooth zoom ring smooth great picture quality |
| negative: | does need flare control |
| comment: | My 2nd favorite, but mostly used lens. I really can not say enough about this. About the only negative I can think of is that boy it would be nice if this were a 24-85 or 105 length. Why? Because I would kill for a lens with that range with this quality. As another reviewer mentioned, this lens could have better flare control. Just need to pay attention for it. However it is hardly a deal stopper. This is the lens that finds itself onto my camera most of the time. There just simply seems little reason to take it off unless I need to go wider or longer. In fact my 50mm 1.7 lens rarely gets used now. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 31
- sharpness: 4.45
- color: 4.65
- build: 5.00
- distortion: 4.58
- flare control: 3.87
- overall: 4.51
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login