Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 vs 12-24mm f4

J Davis said:
For legal reasons I cannot shot the full image from the shot but this is the out of focus background cropped at 100 percent from the top left corner. So what you are seeing is the ceiling lights in Macy's Herald Square at 16mm f2.8.
Click to expand...

J Davis said:
Don't get me wrong tho. The tokina is perfect for video. Invaluable for video.
No good for stills with high contrast edges

2nd day of shooting in Macy's this morning with canon 10-22 efs.
This is the same ceiling at 16mm f4.5, top left corner crop.
Click to expand...

Your two images are pointless unless both are set for f4.5.
 
... said:
Your two images are pointless unless both are set for f4.5.
Click to expand...

Hey this was a real shoot, not me just hanging out in Macy's making lens tests !
I only posted so others can see and use the info. BTW - I'm fairly sure the f stops are at widest on each of the lenses for that focal length so I do think this is
relevant comparison for real life shooting situations. I don't think I had any stopped down tokina shots from that set

If I were to go by feel (and memory from searching thru folders full of stills making selects) I would guess the tokina CA would be worse if I were comparing the two on controlled test using stills.

edit:
and if I had the cash I would own both. The 10-22 for stills and the 11-16 for making films.
 
Last edited:
J Davis said:
edit:
and if I had the cash I would own both. The 10-22 for stills and the 11-16 for making films.
Click to expand...

Have you noticed the difference in distortion of objects close to the camera and to the outside of the frame. The Tokina at 11mm looked pretty stretched and distorted from the center frame to the sides.
Here are a few frame grabs from my Tokina lens test. I wasn't looking for this when I tested the lens and only noticed it when I reviewed the footage. I will pay more attention to this kind of distortion the next time I run a test, and try to post a more focused set of images.
Of course while an 11mm lens isn't designed for portrait work, people will always be around to get in the shot.
 

Attachments

  • WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-001.jpg
    WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-001.jpg
    69.4 KB · Views: 0
  • WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-002.jpg
    WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-002.jpg
    277 KB · Views: 0
  • WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-001-CROP.jpg
    WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-001-CROP.jpg
    109.1 KB · Views: 0
  • WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-002-CROP.jpg
    WIDE-GRAB-TOKINA-002-CROP.jpg
    286.9 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Are you guys talking about stills ?

1) if you are shooting pro stills, 11-16, 12-24 whatever - they are all a pile of sh1t

You need full frame and primes or quality on brand zooms nikon 14-24, canon 16-35

Even my nikkor 14-2.8 has a pile of CA, as does the 16-35 canon on a 1ds4/5dmk2

Im used to grabbing that purple fringing and desaturating it in post

-shooting raw and using CA correction does wonders

- for proper interior shooting proper cameras , hasselblad, arca, phase one come into their own

S
 
steventimothy said:
Here's another example of some Tokina CA, this time on a zoom, the 80-200 f2.8. A little more pronounced, but the same colour! I kind of like it, but I don't think my client would.

4822112560_361fac5c99_b.jpg
Click to expand...

Thas not CA - which is magenta one side and green the other that those purple fringes are 'purple fringing' which is an imaginitve title for the artifact

Due to the sensor not being able to handle the overexposure to dark step

S
 
ken rockwell is the rush limbaugh or ralph nader of the photog world. opinionated and bigoted, and somewhere therein one can find a fact or two.

Superwides are really not for interiors with people/subjects anyways. they are for landscapes. rent one, try it, and report back. my Nikkor 12-24 stays in its bag most the time. Widest i use 24mm, 28mm, or 35mm. Preferably 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, or at the extreme end 135mm. 28 or 35 for landscapes, 85 or 105 for people, 135 for scenic people shots/wedding work.
 
Last edited:
@ morgan

I'm no pro still shooter, I'm just a film maker that dabbles in stills when the money is right
 
J Davis said:
@ morgan

I'm no pro still shooter, I'm just a film maker that dabbles in stills when the money is right
Click to expand...

nothing wrong with that - I make money shooting hotel stills (hence lots of experience with wide angles) - I much prefer shooting films

im just saying that I dont think these issues are unusual for the kit level

you certainly want to check out how CA correction in raw software can help sort out problems of this nature with stills

rock on raw video !

I promise even with a 5d2, and 16-35 on a (paid for hotel stills) job last week we were manually desaturating the CA in photoshop

S
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top