I have the opportunity to get the Tokina 16-50 f/2.8 with Nikon mount for a very reasonable price. I am doing documentary and event coverage, and this seems to be the right run and gun lens for the job.
If you might like to share your experience:
1.) How does the lens perform on the AF100, especially wide open at 16mm and wide open at 50mm? It's an APS-C-lens so it might be possible that it performs better on the AF100's 4/3"-sensor...?
2.) What about the close focus capabilities? The minimum focus distance is 0.30m. Is it maintained throughout the whole zoom range?
3.) Some reviews say that the zoom ring and the focus ring are both smooth and pleasingly damped. How do you think do they perform for video work? I know zooming while recording is a no-go, but do you think smooth zooms are possible with this lens?
4.) Does the focus ring have a long enough focus path that allows accurate manual focusing?
5.) Is it parfocal?
6.) What about focus breathing: Does the image size change as the lens is focused?
7.) How does it work with the Novoflex adapter? (I heard about some cheaper adapters which don't open the iris completely to f/2.8).
Thank you very much in advance!
Results 1 to 6 of 6
02-28-2012 04:12 AM
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
02-28-2012 01:10 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
Own it, use it (with the Novoflex) when I have to cover an event that is tough to get with any of my Nikon primes or Voigt 0.95. Used it today on a run and gun style corporate and gave a suitable image. That said just attempted to use the Tokina on a feature doc I shot over the last two months and decided to rather just move in on subjects with primes rather than reach for the Tokina. Whatever I do, cannot get a great image out of it. Good, sharp ,nice. With peaking in the AF100 it's as good as autofocus, easy to use.... its just flat, has no personality. I throw on my Nikon 35mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.2 and the light is worlds apart. I would be keen to test, maybe rent the Nikon version 16-55m?, but its over twice the price and weight to the Tokina 17-50 2.8. It's a good video lens but will not give great 'cinema' images. Test it 1st for a weekend, worth the rental if youre in the USA (im not). I own an old NIkon 35-70mm 2.8 that is clumsy, has awful push pull zoom but the image is really great but it's also outside that wide focal range everyone desires. Novoflex is your aperture so it's all guess work as to were you are, works fine, smooth, and solid adapter. I use it to zoom while i'm shooting, just cut the zoom when editing if looks horrible. Parfocal... yes focus and aperture remain constant through the zoom. I sold my 14-140 because it had same issues, nice but not for me.
03-11-2012 02:13 PM
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
Thanks both for your input. Finally I purchased the lens and I really like it (even more than the Tamron 17-50 which I also own but unfortunately with Canon mount).
For all those readers who might also be interested in this lens I will answer a few of my questions myself :-)
1.) I don't know yet really, it's too early to strike a balance.
2.) The minimum focus distance is maintained throughout the whole zoom range.
3.) Zoom ring and focus ring are really really smooth. It's a joy working with it.
4.) The path of the focus ring is very short, maybe as short as on the Tamron.
5.) It seems to be parfocal (I don't know if it's officialy a parfocal lens but it holds sharpness very well).
6.) Zoom breathing is minimal.
7.) It works perfectly with the Novoflex adapter.
07-27-2012 09:01 PM
Focus throw is very shot on this lens. And as noted the extension is rediculous.