Tokina AT-X 11-16 f/2.8 PRO DX Ⅱ Lens Announced

P

paul13walnut5

Guest
Whilst the benefits of a better coating should never be underestimated (more of the wrong light reflected away, more of the good light let through) the positive side is that the cheaper mk1 remains excellent value..

I actually had a bit of bother getting hold of one, and so can only imagine that the used value, should I ever part with it, should be a good proportion of it's new value.
 

RLPhoto

Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
Mar 27, 2012
3,778
0
San Antonio, TX
www.Ramonlperez.com
Marsu42 said:
RLPhoto said:
Interesting, Might replace my 10-22mm after all. :eek:

I'd get the Tokina over the Canon, too - but it's a little letdown that the mk2 version for Canon seems to be not even face-lifted, but just with new coating.

But the 10-22mm has almost no distortion. :'( It'd be hard to part with w/o renting the tokina first.
 

Marsu42

Canon Pride.
Feb 7, 2012
6,314
0
Berlin
der-tierfotograf.de
RLPhoto said:
But the 10-22mm has almost no distortion. :'( It'd be hard to part with w/o renting the tokina first.

If you rent it, please let us know your findings - I'd be very interested since you seem to be very specific about the lenses you use. But everything I've read about the Tokina is very favorable (it's nearly a prime lens with the tiny zoom range), it's f2.8, it's very sharp and while Canon might be better the little distortion is simple to correct in post.