Tokina’s three AT-X digital-only zooms together span focal lengths from 10mm to 400mm. This lens ($450, street)—comparable to Canon’s stabilized 18–135mm and Nikon’s discontinued 18–135mm kit lenses—is equivalent to about 26–216mm or 25–202mm in fullframe terms, depending on the DSLR. Its 8X zoom range and wide 16.5mm starting point suited almost every subject we aimed at.
Available only in Canon and Nikon mounts, it has three aspheric elements (one glass molded, two plastic/glass hybrids), and two elements of Super-low Dispersion (SD) glass. Autofocus is quick though slightly noisy. Because the lens focuses internally, it’s good for lens-mounted accessories. Its lenshood is nicely velvet-flocked.
The ample manual-focusing ring, which locks in AF mode, has a very short turning travel and a slightly underdamped and noisy turn. The zoom action was ungainly and uneven, but we encountered no creep.
Another beef: The MF/AF switch is very close to the mount, and, marked in black-on-black, is hard to see with the camera at head- or chest-level.
In the Popular Photography Test Lab, the optics performed well. Sharpness, light falloff, and distortion control were, on the whole, slightly above-average for the class. On our lens bench, its SQF numbers at 11x14 nearly matched the comparable Canon and Nikon zooms, but this lens clearly beat both in distortion control and light falloff.
Maximum magnification of 1:5 was okay, but not up to the Canon or Nikon scores of about 1:4.
For most shooters, the best thing about this Tokina is that 8X zoom range. Starting wider than almost any of the superzooms, it carries you deep into tele. Scenics, travel, portraits, interiors, you name it: There are few subjects it can’t reel in.
pictures so that we can see what it can do??????? We've been asking for a while now that who ever does the testing for lenses SHOULD have pictures in various stages to see what the lens can do.
Do you really think you can assess the quality of a lens by looking at an image on the web?
"to see what it can do"...
For what it's worth, Pop Photo lens reviews are among the best anywhere- scientifically. When you look at the chart , included in every review, this lens scores a B to C+ for 20x24 enlargements at all f-stops at three focal lengths (various stages)-- Probably good enough for a casual shooter. However, I wouldn't plan on shooting for a client using this lens, if large prints are going to be offered. Also, it's widest aperture at 135mm is only an f/5.6. This is Not going to be a great low light lens.
I know you want to see actual shots made by this lens. But honestly there are many other factors at play that can affect image quality in the real world. Pop Photo's reviews/tests are done the same way on every lens, every time to eliminate those variables... they actually compare "apples to apples" that way.
If you want to see images made with this lens, you may also use a search engine to look for other reviews that, by the way, almost always include sample pictures. Keep in mind though, not all reviews are subjective- sample images will only tell a small part of the story.
Try pbase.com for sample images.
They left out the part about it opnly works on APS-C cameras. Not compatable with Full-Frame
I am surprised that people are asking to see images. Surely they must realize that jpg's on an LCD monitor are going to tell them nothing about the lens. And yes, I agree that the lens tests by Pop Photo give me the best possible indication of how my lens will perform in the field provided that I focus it very precisely and hold it very steady on a tripod.
Keep up the good work folks. Some of us understand to some extent, the value of the service your optical testing lab provides.
George
I think posting photos is of utmost importance despite some inherent losses due to uploading. Pictures can show color balance and contrast, a determinant factor in lens quality. Of course pictures have to be taken in similar lighting conditions to be comparable.
That review told me almost nothing. What most users are going to want to know is how this lens compares head-to-head against its Canon, Nikon and other third-party competitors.
Nice that "Canon and Nikon users have a versatile new zoom option." Like more of 'em are needed. But my beef with Tokina is that they ignore Sony/Konica/Minolta and Pentax owners.
A Very useful focal length so far a single walk around lens is concerned. Almost same as 18-135 from other manufacturers. However the absence of Vibration Control is a point that will be felt missing. Canon users have another choice but Nikon users remain in the same boat.
Regards,
www.magicshutters.net
I agree with the first Anonymous. Pictures tells a thousand words especially with comparison against lenses of other brands with similar specs.
Pop Photo lens tests are amazing because they're the only ones that will let you compare lenses to one another on a known range of objective criteria—that's their strength. The magazine spent a lot of time and money getting their testing procedure down and we should all be very grateful the magazine is still doing it that way.
If you want to see how the lens performs in the real world, go to Flickr.com and do a search for the lens. You'll be able to see hundreds of shots made with a wide range of subjects, lighting, weather, cameras, and locations. That's will tell you if the lens can do what you need it to do.
Who said that sample images have to be real world examples? Take slrgear or dpreview's lens test, for instance, they always show you a _controlled_ studio shot that is exactly the same every time and gives you the best possible indication of exactly how well or poorly a lens performs. Obviously sample images need to be full sized and not compressed for the web to be of any use. As it stands, pop photo reviews are useless.
I have always loved Popular Photography and I'm glad they give us this opportunity to air our views. Thank you Miriam Leuchter!!
I wish that you could get the charts that are in the magazine on the web.
I also wish there was an index of lens that have been tested.
Finally I wish that they would maintain all of their test on the web. I don't know why they roll off the older tests.
To bad no one is listening. The PopPhoto web site is really not up to good current design. Most of the competorator sites are much superior in content and searching features.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
pictures so that we can see what it can do??????? We've been asking for a while now that who ever does the testing for lenses SHOULD have pictures in various stages to see what the lens can do.
Do you really think you can assess the quality of a lens by looking at an image on the web?
"to see what it can do"...
For what it's worth, Pop Photo lens reviews are among the best anywhere- scientifically. When you look at the chart , included in every review, this lens scores a B to C+ for 20x24 enlargements at all f-stops at three focal lengths (various stages)-- Probably good enough for a casual shooter. However, I wouldn't plan on shooting for a client using this lens, if large prints are going to be offered. Also, it's widest aperture at 135mm is only an f/5.6. This is Not going to be a great low light lens.
I know you want to see actual shots made by this lens. But honestly there are many other factors at play that can affect image quality in the real world. Pop Photo's reviews/tests are done the same way on every lens, every time to eliminate those variables... they actually compare "apples to apples" that way.
If you want to see images made with this lens, you may also use a search engine to look for other reviews that, by the way, almost always include sample pictures. Keep in mind though, not all reviews are subjective- sample images will only tell a small part of the story.
Try pbase.com for sample images.
They left out the part about it opnly works on APS-C cameras. Not compatable with Full-Frame
I am surprised that people are asking to see images. Surely they must realize that jpg's on an LCD monitor are going to tell them nothing about the lens. And yes, I agree that the lens tests by Pop Photo give me the best possible indication of how my lens will perform in the field provided that I focus it very precisely and hold it very steady on a tripod.
Keep up the good work folks. Some of us understand to some extent, the value of the service your optical testing lab provides.
George
I think posting photos is of utmost importance despite some inherent losses due to uploading. Pictures can show color balance and contrast, a determinant factor in lens quality. Of course pictures have to be taken in similar lighting conditions to be comparable.
That review told me almost nothing. What most users are going to want to know is how this lens compares head-to-head against its Canon, Nikon and other third-party competitors.
Nice that "Canon and Nikon users have a versatile new zoom option." Like more of 'em are needed. But my beef with Tokina is that they ignore Sony/Konica/Minolta and Pentax owners.
A Very useful focal length so far a single walk around lens is concerned. Almost same as 18-135 from other manufacturers. However the absence of Vibration Control is a point that will be felt missing. Canon users have another choice but Nikon users remain in the same boat.
Regards,
www.magicshutters.net
I agree with the first Anonymous. Pictures tells a thousand words especially with comparison against lenses of other brands with similar specs.
Pop Photo lens tests are amazing because they're the only ones that will let you compare lenses to one another on a known range of objective criteria—that's their strength. The magazine spent a lot of time and money getting their testing procedure down and we should all be very grateful the magazine is still doing it that way.
If you want to see how the lens performs in the real world, go to Flickr.com and do a search for the lens. You'll be able to see hundreds of shots made with a wide range of subjects, lighting, weather, cameras, and locations. That's will tell you if the lens can do what you need it to do.
Who said that sample images have to be real world examples? Take slrgear or dpreview's lens test, for instance, they always show you a _controlled_ studio shot that is exactly the same every time and gives you the best possible indication of exactly how well or poorly a lens performs. Obviously sample images need to be full sized and not compressed for the web to be of any use. As it stands, pop photo reviews are useless.
I have always loved Popular Photography and I'm glad they give us this opportunity to air our views. Thank you Miriam Leuchter!!
I wish that you could get the charts that are in the magazine on the web.
I also wish there was an index of lens that have been tested.
Finally I wish that they would maintain all of their test on the web. I don't know why they roll off the older tests.
To bad no one is listening. The PopPhoto web site is really not up to good current design. Most of the competorator sites are much superior in content and searching features.