D800 & Tokina 11-16

M

Marc Lucas

Active member
Was trying out a Tokina 11-16 yesterday as a possible purchase for use on a Glidecam. When I connected the lens there was very visible vignetting on the lens. When I tried to go into settings to change from FX to DX it was greyed out. Should I of selected DX mode before I connected the lens then the camera would of recognised that it was a DX lens?
I could get rid of the vignetting by zooming in a little but would the camera & lens still be working in synergy?
If this lens isn't suitable what others around this price range would be good for Glidecam work with the D800?
Thanks
 
Marc Lucas said:
Was trying out a Tokina 11-16 yesterday as a possible purchase for use on a Glidecam. When I connected the lens there was very visible vignetting on the lens. When I tried to go into settings to change from FX to DX it was greyed out. Should I of selected DX mode before I connected the lens then the camera would of recognised that it was a DX lens?
I could get rid of the vignetting by zooming in a little but would the camera & lens still be working in synergy?
If this lens isn't suitable what others around this price range would be good for Glidecam work with the D800?
Thanks
Click to expand...

The Tokina 11-16 was designed for cropped or APS-C cameras and will always vignette on full frame cameras like the D800.

There really isn't a suitable wide angle lens in the same price range, not that I'm aware of anyways. The Nikon 14-24 2.8 is an awesome lens but it's around the $2000 mark. You could also look at the 16-35mm f4 for about $1200
 
The tokina 11-16 can in fact work properly on full frame as a 15-16mm f/2.8 lens, but I have no idea about how soft the corners can be. And it certainly should work on the D800 in DX mode, no idea why the camera would refuse to change to that mode.
 
Last edited:
Samuel H said:
The tokina 11-16 can in fact work properly on full frame as a 15-16mm f/2.8 lens, but I have no idea about how soft the corners can be. And it certainly should work on the D800 in DX mode, no idea why the camera would refuse to change to that mode.
Click to expand...

It's soft.
 
...but as long as the main frame is not soft wouldn't that add to the character of the lens. I would be using it for Glidecam work at in a Wedding environment where lots of the other shots would be shot with shallow DOF in mind.
 
I asked about that 16-28 on a couple of other threads, and couldn't find a user with experience with it. I'm not sure how useful it is for video: it doesn't take filters.
 
If you are interested in ultra-wide, you might consider the FX (full-frame) Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 lens. They sell for under $900 new (or $830 grey-market), but occasionally you can find good used ones for considerably less.

I own one of these (for a D700), and 12mm wide is very very different from 16mm.

Some 12mm (FX) examples:

p691243329-2.jpg p1017305926-2.jpg p812279165-2.jpg p580212768-2.jpg p956022948-2.jpg

-- Bob Elkind
 
Last edited:
Many people like to say that wide shots don't look good for film but damn if I don't think these stills look great.
 
I think ultra-wide can look great in movement too. But you have to avoid the camera movements that will make it look weird.
 
I love my 14-24 f2.8 and while its great on the Nikon it is also very handy on an AF100 (with a Novaflex G adaptor). I brought mine second hand for $1600
 
CineStill said:
I love my 14-24 f2.8 and while its great on the Nikon it is also very handy on an AF100 (with a Novaflex G adaptor). I brought mine second hand for $1600
Click to expand...

Right. The Nikon 14-24/2.8 is widely regarded as the finest available UWA (ultra wide angle) (zoom, AF) lens. Its greatest claim to fame is its absolute drop-dead sharpness. At 3-4x the cost of a used Sigma 12-24 lens, professional still photographers consider the Nikon 14-24/2.8 a bargain as well as a 'must-have' lens.

If you can afford it, buy the Nikon big dog. If you can't afford the Nikon, give the Sigma 12-24 a look -- it's probably the next best lens for FX rigs.

Completely off-topic:

If you are interested in an UWA lens for a DX (not FX) body, the widest and sharpest lens on the market is likely the Sigma 8-16mm. My son owns a copy which he uses on a Nikon D90, and I was flabbergasted by its performance. Apparently others have seen similar results from this lens.

-- Bob Elkind
 
Last edited:
eteam said:
If you can afford it, buy the Nikon big dog. If you can't afford the Nikon, give the Sigma 12-24 a look -- it's probably the next best lens for FX rigs.
Click to expand...

There is also 1 stop and a half of brightness difference. Maybe insignificant for stills, but could be a decisive factor if you have to shoot video on a steadicam with available light in dark environments (thankfully the D800 and 5Dmark III allow the ISO to be pushed...).
I have seen the Nikon 14-24 on the D800 and it is like WOW! if you need to go that wide.
 
Samuel H said:
I asked about that 16-28 on a couple of other threads, and couldn't find a user with experience with it. I'm not sure how useful it is for video: it doesn't take filters.
Click to expand...


OOps, good point. The inability to take filters would kill its usefulness for video. My bad.
 
eteam said:
Right. The Nikon 14-24/2.8 is widely regarded as the finest available UWA (ultra wide angle) lens.
Click to expand...
What about the new Zeiss ZF 15mm f/2.8? If only it wasn't 3k. One advantage it has over the Nikon 14-24 is that it takes filters albeit thin ones.
 
Fluoro said:
What about the new Zeiss ZF 15mm f/2.8? If only it wasn't 3k. One advantage it has over the Nikon 14-24 is that it takes filters albeit thin ones.
Click to expand...

The Nikon has:

  • much wider focal length range.
  • much faster auto-focus.

Just my two cents.

:)

-- Bob Elkind
 
kostas said:
There is also 1 stop and a half of brightness difference. Maybe insignificant for stills, but could be a decisive factor if you have to shoot video on a steadicam with available light in dark environments (thankfully the D800 and 5Dmark III allow the ISO to be pushed...).
I have seen the Nikon 14-24 on the D800 and it is like WOW! if you need to go that wide.
Click to expand...


Both of those lenses suffer from the same issue that Sammuel H brought up about the Tokina 16-28mm. None of these lenses can accept filters.
 
In these days of colour grading in post, how often is the use of a lens filter a critical necessity?
Is the necessity limited to gradient filters and (excepting wide angle lenses) polarisers?

-- Bob Elkind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top