Review of the Tokina AT-X PRO lens SD 16-28 F2.8 (IF) FX Aspherical N/AIS especially for Radozhiva prepared Peter Shpak.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
The Tokina AT-X 16-28 f / 2.8 PRO FX lens is the best budget alternative to such ultra-wide lenses from Nikon and Canon. Unless, of course, you can find a specimen with accurate autofocus and lenses correctly calibrated along the axis. However, when it is possible to return the lens back to the seller, then in the end you will still come across a very suitable copy. I had to change such a lens only once. But still, on my camera Nikon D610 I need to set '-15' in the autofocus setting. The famous German website Photozone.de writes that they were lucky only the third time.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
Tokina AT-X 16-28 f / 2.8 is available for Nikon and Canon, and is designed for full-frame cameras. For crop, it makes no sense to use such lenses, because all of their value is in the ultra-wide range of focal lengths.
The 'PRO' designation stands for superior quality lens. It is assembled very well, everything is fitted tightly, I have no complaints. This is a 'G' type lens with no aperture ring. The lens also has a built-in focusing motor, and is suitable for all Nikon DSLR cameras. Assembled in Japan.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
Internal focusing - the front and rear lenses remain fixed. The zoom lens, on the contrary, is not internal - the front and rear lenses move back and forth, while moderately pumping air.
The front lens is huge and convex, so filters cannot be installed. For lovers of light filters, this is definitely a minus. I somehow don’t worry - the built-in hood is quite tolerable against impacts on various flat surfaces.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
The optical design consists of 15 elements in 13 groups. Three elements are aspherical, three are made of low-dispersion glass, like Nikon's ED. The lenses are multi-coated. The lens holds back and side light very well. You need to try to catch hares. Basically, small glare comes from bright, narrow beam bulbs such as halogen reflectors.
MFD lens - 28 cm. Viewing angle - 107.1º-76.9º. Aperture - 9 rounded blades. It is not customary to talk about bokeh in ultra-wide lenses, they are not taken for portraits or for bokeh.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
There are two rubberized rings on the lens. The smaller one, the zoom ring, rotates smoothly as expected. The larger ring is manual focus. To switch from autofocus mode, pull it towards you. In autofocus mode, it spins freely and does not affect anything, so you can safely hold on to it. The autofocus speed is average, in poor light and without contrasting details, it tends to travel a little back and forth. Focusing never blurs, but for some reason the camera's live view flatly refuses to work with it. Maybe it's specific Nikon D610.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8
The back of the lens has a rubber gasket, which means there is a certain level of dust and moisture protection.
A focal length of 16mm is not so ultra-short, but at the same time it is quite enough for most photo tasks. The fact is that the shorter the focal length of the lens, the more difficult it is to work with it. Already with 16mm it is not easy to cope, and with 14mm and even more so with 11mm difficulties begin at a completely different level.
The lens is sharp in the center of the frame already with f / 2.8. The edges and corners slightly sag, but this can only be seen on the monitor, with a 100% increase. On printed works it is extremely difficult to make out. At f / 4, the lens is sharp across the entire field of the frame.
Distortion is very moderate, less than the Nikon 14-24mm f / 2.8 AF-S G, a simple type. IN D610 she almost always straightens completely.
The Tokina AT-X 16-28 f / 2.8 lens is quite large and heavy - 946 g. It is difficult to fit into the case, taking up a lot of space. He sits in his hand, nothing dangles or rattles. It's a pleasure to work with him.
Tokina 16-28mm f / 2.8 and Nikon ED AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1: 2.8D MKIII
On the same Photozone.de this lens is praised, mentioning weak edges and corners at open aperture. I, in turn, did not notice this. In general, it is not clear how the Germans define sharpness there for such super-wide lenses. It seems that their depth of field plane is distorted when approaching infinity, that is, it becomes convex, as if in the shape of the front lens. If you look at the photos in the gallery, where the large rooms were shot, you can see that at f / 2.8 the walls, ceiling and floor are more or less in focus. At f / 4, sharpness is all over the frame. But at distances close to the MFD, the depth of field is practically flat (although I strongly doubt that it is perfectly flat). In the picture of the sideboard, the plates from the edges are closer, and you can see how they completely fall out of focus. (This is all just my assumption, I could not think of another explanation for this phenomenon). The maximum resolution is reached already at f / 4. The resolution is generally excellent. From the camera D610 I was able to print material for an exhibition measuring two by three meters. Everything was relatively sharp there, even if you look at it point blank.
I had the opportunity to compare this lens with Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm 1: 2.8G VR N Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical, and I can say with certainty that he is not inferior to the native lens in terms of sharpness or image quality. And as you know, Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm 1: 2.8G VR N Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical, (on a par with Canon EF 11-24mm f / 4 L) is the best ultra-wide lens of all, regardless of price and manufacturer. It is clear that here we are talking about shooting a real three-dimensional world, and not black and white squares and stripes hanging on the wall.
You can download RAW + JPEG source files at this link (26 files in '.NEF', '.JPEG' format, 754 MB). All photos were taken on Nikon D610.
You can see the real prices for the lens here, or in the price block below:
All prices on Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-28
Conclusions
Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-28 F2.8 (IF) FX Aspherical N/AIS is simply an excellent ultra-wide-angle lens, if you are lucky and can find a good one.
A list of all reviews from readers of Radozhiva will find here.
There is such a wonderful glass, lucky the first time.
key phrase - if you're lucky
A good review of all readers of Radozhiva Happy New Year! Arcade of creative success and prosperity
A similar situation was with me with Tamron 17-50 with a stub (I had to give it for adjustment) and with a friend with Sigma 50 f / 1.4 (shifting the focusing axis / plane - we went through the options - lucky the third time).
So, unfortunately, alternative optics is still a lottery. If you buy 24-105 f / 4 only the second copy without front focus turned out to be a native one (and it smears a little by 105mm, although it may be in the camera), then what can we say about "alternatives" ... (
Nikon is still the same lottery. Buying 85 1.8 G I chose my copy only on the third attempt - at first they brought it from the warehouse in packaging, but as a result I took it from the window. No special requirements - just correct autofocus operation. 50 1.4G took without looking - amendment -20. Took 28 1.8 - not to compare with Sigma 35 1.4 ART. Now it is in a box, I don’t want to sell, but I don’t use it either. And he took his sigma in online stores. Therefore, I disagree, and categorically
The native 85 1.4G acquired in the 14th year stably gave front focus on 3 cameras. You were treated with an amendment, but the fact itself speaks for itself.
24-105 or 24-120?
Nikon or Canon?
The idea of third-party reviews makes sense, but editing and verification is still necessary.
Obliquely overlooked the review and caught only on the opposition of the “real three-dimensional world” (in the understanding of the author - a wardrobe with tarElki) and black and white squares hung on the wall :) I reread and thought a lot ...
To the author of the luzor: to get acquainted with the materiel of hobby more closely and thoroughly - the tragic discrepancy between plates and large rooms is easily resolved using the online depth of field calculator. Put the numbers in there, look at the results and lag behind the Germans, exhausted by squares and stripes ...
What's wrong with the comment? Where did the cry of the soul go?
The idea of third-party reviews makes sense, but editing and verification is still necessary.
Obliquely overlooked the review and caught only on the opposition of the “real three-dimensional world” (in the understanding of the author - a wardrobe with tarElki) and black and white squares hung on the wall :) I reread and thought a lot ...
To the author of the luzor: to get acquainted with the materiel of hobby more closely and thoroughly - the tragic discrepancy between plates and large rooms is easily resolved using the online depth of field calculator. Put the numbers in there, look at the results and lag behind the Germans, exhausted by squares and stripes ...
The citizen, it seems, wrote from a hangover, I really didn’t understand what didn’t suit him like that.
About the plane of depth of field in super-widths. I've only seen this on Nikon 14-24mm f / 2.8 and this Tokina, so I won't talk about everything. When you focus on distances close to infinity, then theoretically the depth of field should begin, across the entire field, from about 2.5 meters to infinity. In fact, and this has been experimentally tested by me, at the edges of the frame it starts much closer than two meters, but in the middle it goes further, from 5-10 meters. This can be seen in some pictures with a chandelier - the background and walls are more or less sharp, but the chandelier is not. When I was shooting one local river in autumn, the opposite bank along the edges also got out of focus. All this allows me to assert that the optical depth of field is distorted relative to the geometric one.
Something I strongly doubt that the d610 or any other camera from Nikon will be able to automatically correct the distortion of third-party lenses on the machine. In my opinion, an error crept in here.
No, everything is correctly written. The firmware of the D610 camera has a database of distortions of all more or less well-known lenses.
In any Nikon camera there is a database of lenses. This I know =) Only in it are only Nikon lenses, no Tokina, Sigma, etc. cannot be there.
Clear. So I made a mistake.
Good evening. the other day I became the owner of such glass. to the full frame of Nikon df. In the store, it was not possible to test it properly. I began to check it on the target at home - with a change in focal point from edge to edge - it appeared either back or front focus. I do not understand - whether it is normal for shirik. whether it is necessary to carry the glass back. can you give some useful advice - I will be immensely grateful.
Arkady - many thanks for the helpful articles and reviews.
It does not make sense to check on targets. Go out and shoot there. Well, or in those conditions in which you were going to use it.
Thanks for the information. If possible, please give a couple of advisers on this glass, what exactly should you pay close attention to so that the lens will please you for many years. can be in the mail uje126@mail.ru
thanks in advance.
I don't even know what you can advise here ...
The main thing here is to feel the specifics of shooting with an ultra-wide lens, no matter what. Learn to imagine the end result before you even take a picture. Search for new forms and solutions of compositions. Think over all possible options.
In general, as always, with any optics and technology.
Thanks Peter.
And how is the target different from the street? The same eggs only in profile
If you watch the street on TV, then nothing.
Today I received the second Tokinu 16-28 in the mail. I changed it. Both have strange behaviors _ at 16mm focusing perfectly, and at 28mm back focus. On Nikon D610 you need to set '-17', but then a clear front focus appeared at 16mm _ this is about the first. Today I got the second one, better at 28mm I put '-6', at 16mm almost exactly. There are 14 days for a replacement. Here I sit and think to leave or try again. Maybe this is the whole series, the last digits of the first Tokina are 30, the second is 38.
I have a similar story. as Peter correctly said - you need to apply glass in place. to shoot at targets a little incorrectly in relation to this glass.
There was a wedding shooting in additional. day miss approx. every 15 frames, I have 50 and 85 smears as well). Great lens. Much better, clearer and brighter than my previous Samyang 14 / f2.8. + autofocus, zoom. Samyang has a wider angle - 14mm, but after shooting with Tokina, I am convinced that the picture is better in the corners. Samyang has dark corners, dips in clarity, distorting geometry - people at the edges cannot be filmed, only in the center of the frame. You can go everywhere with Tokina. Tokina has practically no distortion, in this indicator she is the best in the class. Hares are caught the same day. Tokin is actually twice as heavy. For those who choose between Samyang 14 and Tokina 16-28, I definitely advise you to take $ 200 more expensive than Tokin.
It’s very good that he came up to you. Try night shooting with it, because the flash should be separate, because The camera may leave a shadow from the lens.
Without a flash, you can shoot a night city from your hands; there are a lot of different interesting compositions there, even in the most unexpected places. Street lights give completely unrealistic shades that are completely invisible to the ordinary eye.
Tokina AT-X 17-35mm f / 4 Pro FX Nikon F is the same, but the focus is different?
I take a closer look at buying before the given d700 asset, I think that I’ll have enough health with my head, for 610 everything is ok. Chi varto razozlagateli second-hand variant?
Yes, of course, permission is enough. But only used can be taken only with the condition of return, if the lens is smeared. However, it’s better to save up and take it at a telescopic store that accepts returns without any problems.
Taking the Danish ob'єktiv. I'm afraid, once in the category, it's quiet, who have never been lucky for the first time. Having tried on razdrukovanyh targets, little radio - nakr. sharpness 4.0-5,6. It’s not enough for landscapes. Having tried it on the streets, wonderful speeches, focus on the distant objects of lack of strength, at that hour, as the focus on those close to you is to reach the good. What is the problem of an obshchivan with inferiority and how to twist an amendment in mascara for skin focusing? Having tried +10 then without any difference, I may have a day or two back (14 days).
That is the question. In principle, you need a shirik, an angle of 12-16, for reporting. Is it worth considering as an alternative to SamYang 14mm? I know that there is no autofocus, but on w. corner, as it were, and not really needed.
What do you advise? As an alternative, consider Tamron 15-30 2.8
As I understand it, do you need shirik for reporting on the premises? At close range, AF is still needed. Samyang 14mm has a complicated distortion, and this thing is not cured.
Also, in the report it is very important to get the maximum shots without misses AF. I don’t know how Tamron will behave in a bad light (and in the rooms the light is almost always bad).
"Difficult distortion" - or in common parlance "mustache" - at Samyang 14mm are well treated in lightroom, just download the profiles of this lens.
The C14 is an excellent non-autofocus alternative to ultra wide with good color rendition and good sharpness even in the open. Minus: they are usually not aligned, that is, infinity is not where the scale shows. It is also easy to treat. But even without this, focusing on an ultra-wide angle with a huge depth of field does not cause any particular problems, even in reporting. In fact, it's enough to remember 2-3 positions of the focusing ring: “two meters, three meters, everything else” and the practice of shooting with non-autofocus optics. So autofocus is good - but even without it, you can shoot reports, especially at ultra-wide.
Another pluses of the C14 are weight and price, it is not a pity where you can not take a more expensive zoom. But in most cases, the super-width is removed at the short end, for the sake of it, the super-width is bought. And for other things - you need 24-70.
Distortion can be treated with profiles without any problems.
All the same, one dzherela seems to be, what is the best win on f8, if I’m talking about f4-5.6
Who are you speaking to?
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tokina-at-x-16-28mm-f-2-8-pro-fx-lens-review-16537
Here on diaph. 4
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Tokina/AT-X16-28-F2.8-PRO-FX-Nikon-mounted-on-Nikon-D700__441
My copy on d700 on the basis of rozdrukovanyh tests and photos on the street showing є nikr іzkіst at 4. This is clearly not enough for the landscape.
Glass for 60 rubles, declared as a top-quality lens (PRO) for more than half of the defective focus! Where am I going to get it in my Muhosransk, just chop them nuts!
Is the Tokina AT-X 17-35mm f / 4 Pro FX Nikon F the same, only the focal one different?
You completely puzzled me. In what sense, the same thing?
Hahaha, really had fun
Well, this is also a lens)
I ordered it on the Internet, I did not know about such a lottery, now I'm afraid) But you need a budget for interiors, at least for a start. I think it’s better not to find glass in this price category
Roman, I heard now the situation is better, marriage is much less.
Bought this lens for Nikon D800 on the run before traveling to Florence and Pompeii. There, as I expected, it is difficult to shoot without a width. Only this one was available in stores. I checked the raid, everything seemed to be in focus, on all FRs Even without correction on the camera. I took a lot of pictures during the trip, there was, of course, a marriage as always, in the same percentage as with other lenses. I was pleased with the result. And there was no need to check the focusing accuracy. I took it with joy, with me on trips around the world. I bought the D810, decided to fine-tune the correction and saw the problem here. On average, FR 22mm, everything is fine even without fine adjustment of the focus to 0. At 16 back, at 28, the front is focus, the middle of the target is in focus in both cases. You can, of course, focus closer or farther than the object and get your advantages from this. For the first time I bought a lens without really checking it, but at random I got it ... They don't want to take this lens anywhere, and now I live with this problem. I used to gladly take this lens, now it's very rare.
Vladimir, these lenses are not checked on targets - the depth of field is not flat.
I agree. But the pictures are the same. In one extreme range, everything further than the subject is blurry, in the other, everything to the subject is blurry. On a covered diaphragm, of course, everything is better, but its value is 2,8 in low light. This is probably purely psychological, constantly in the head. I want everything to work correctly. And so, the lens is very good. I want to buy Tamron 15-30mm f / 2.8 di vc usd Nikon. You are not expected to review it?
Quite possible. It all depends on the subject. I don’t have such oddities, but I didn’t shoot people from this close range with this Tokina.
By the way, my Nikon 35-70 f / 2.8 has the same problem if I shoot on the D610. On D3s, everything is fine. Perhaps there’s also a case in the camera.
My D750 behaves exactly the same as on the D810. People rarely shoot them and not at close range. I will benefit from this effect.
As for Tamron, if someone sends him to Arkady, there will be a review.
Tamron will be newer, for sure everything with AF is much better. But then again, no one knows 100%.
In general, for amateur photography it is quite enough to take the manual Samyang.
When you go with the company through the ancient city, the zoom is much more convenient + auto focus and if there is still a stub. People do not want to wait while I choose a place for shooting, and if there is a manual fix, there will still need to run to the object or from it. Of course, you can crop on my camera and the quality remains not bad. I always lag behind the company and many start to annoy it. So I need a good wide zoom. I have good fixes, but they are for a more leisurely shoot.
It looks like you really have a defective lens.
About autofocus on a walk. Autofocus is not needed for sirhiriks, there the depth of field starts in a couple of meters, right up to hyper focus. But then, the version of Samyang 14mm quality is very good. The new one, which Premuim, is even better than the Zeiss, has a sky-high price tag.
But. Tamron’s headquarters is a very important thing. Can be removed from hands in the dark.
And about the company, as the saying goes, photography is not a sport, and the viewer is just getting in the way.
If now I have a crop - but I will switch to FF - then there is no point in taking it now? Use whale with 18mm for now? (scenery)
There is no point in taking a crop. Such lenses are the most difficult to work with, especially with the landscape. Wide fix f / 1.8 will give a picture much better.
I will add in order to avoid embarrassment.
Fix will give a better picture in difficult conditions, in poor light, at fast shutter speeds, etc.
Under normal conditions, there will be no difference between any such wide zoom and fix.
Thanks for the review! Now, as I choose between this Tokina and Kenon 17-40 f4. What will be more interesting in terms of picture quality? Fotik kenon first 5d
The lens is chosen for the task. In second place are technical specifications. Someone cares about the size, someone focusing speed. If there are no frank technical flaws, then the picture quality is a wild taste.
If you need a fast aperture for something like a starry sky - better than a token. If universal with a call in a comfortable 40 mm - Canon.
Eugene, both lenses are good. Tokina is lighter by one stop, which is critical for shooting a night city, and anything else in a bad light and at dusk.
But for the first penny I would take my own lenses, it is not known how and what will happen with tokens and sigma. Surely AF they will be worse.
As for the picture quality ... It's like the sound of a symphony orchestra. Some people like the Mariinsky, some New York, some Vienna.
No one except you can determine this.
He cannot physically focus on the distance, reaches a little further infinity, but he needs even further infinity to focus. What to do?
It is necessary to adjust, what other options can there be?
The easiest (probably) solution is to put spacers under the bayonet mount, if you can find such)))
On the contrary, removal)
Yes, you are right, of course the cleanup. The demon beguiled :-(
The feeling as if the focusing distance has changed, near he can focus almost point-blank, and in the distance he simply cannot go further in order to focus, since he rested on infinity
Shot down the helicoid. Adjustment will save you