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

ROCKMORE

ROCKMORE

Veteran
Are there any side by side sharpness comparisons out there between these two lenses. They both have their own advantages in terms of speed and range, but what about image quality. Any expert opinions?
 
Good question. Ken Rockwell (I know, I know) compared the 11-16 with a few Nikon lenses. If you could find comparisons between those Nikons and the 12-24, you could extrapolate.
 
saneproductions said:
I really love the 11-16 and can't see giving up the stop for a bit more range.
Click to expand...

I took my 550D back to the dealer and put a 11-16mm Tokina on for a few on the spot tests. It seem like a very well built lens. Very tight and smooth mechanical movements. I think the range is enough, wide to super wide.
Mike, I asked you a while back about adding a wide adapter to the 11-16. I did try my Century X.7 wide adapter on it today. It had some trouble with the auto focus finding it's mark, and at 11mm a big black circle appeared around the outside from the Century housing. Never know till you try, but it's a no go.
Excellent lens and from what I've seen so far hands on, and I agree the extra stop trumps the range of the 12-24.
 
Last edited:
My 11-16 has been invaluable for motion which is why I was surprised when it failed me on a still shoot.
It was in a clothing store, bad CA on overhead instore lights within the frame.
I'm back in the same store tomorrow for part 2 of the same still shoot and this time we are renting 10-22

2580_tok_ca.jpg
 
Last edited:
J Davis said:
My 11-16 has been invaluable for motion which is why I was surprised when it failed me on a still shoot.
It was in a clothing store, bad CA on overhead instore lights within the frame.
I'm back in the same store tomorrow for part 2 of the same still shoot and this time we are renting 10-22

2580_tok_ca.jpg
Click to expand...

Is it possible to post a clip of that shot? If I'm correct reading your chart the CA numbers at the 16mm end seem to improve at 2.8. Is this right? Is .18 a good or bad number?

I looked at my 11-16mm store tests. They look OK but I was surprised at the low DOF at the 11mm end. The 16mm end seems to have greater DOF. (Greater DOF being more in focus and not less as in the original meaning of the term)
Another thing that bothers me is the amount of distortion. I know this is normal for a lens this wide, but peoples heads get really out of shape when not in the center of the frame.
It's really not a close focuser either. I had to keep a reasonable distance on my close up shots. Again the 16mm end performed better with close up DOF.
The canon 10-22 has very little barrel distortion on a flat chart. Have a look a someones head off to the side of the center of frame at 10mm if you rent the Canon and see weather the head shape is as bad. Some things look normal with the wide distortion like landscapes and other things just look wacked like human heads.
The 11-16 still may be a good daily driver even with the distortion since you can zoom in and correct it when people are in play.
 
The Canon 10-22 might be a better choice if you don't need the extra speed of the Tokina. The extra mm of wideness (don't laugh, it's 10%) might come in handy for you, and the extra 6mm on the other end makes it more versatile. The optics are comparable except there's no CA.

Price is similar to the Tokina.

As for Ken Rockwell, I find his lens reviews very accurate. He just likes mocking people who take the digital side and all its baggage too seriously (like us) :)
 
steventimothy said:
The Canon 10-22 might be a better choice if you don't need the extra speed of the Tokina. The extra mm of wideness (don't laugh, it's 10%) might come in handy for you, and the extra 6mm on the other end makes it more versatile. The optics are comparable except there's no CA.
:)
Click to expand...

Yeah unfortunately for me the speed and constant aperture are the most needed right now.

!6mm is really wide enough for me with the Century x.7. After seeing the extreme distortion on heads on the 11 end of the 11-16, I don't think I want to see that showing up all the time.

!6mm is really wide enough for me with the Century x.7. It gets back to 12mm view and it only looses 1/3 stop. So the Canon 16-35 f2.8L is what I need and will cover ff 5D in the near future.

It's great to do a hands on test with these lenses because what ever good or bad users report back, it's a personal choice what we are all looking for in our shots, and we all see things differently.

The Tokina 11-16 or, 12-24 the Tamron 17-50 VC or non VC and the Canon 10-22 all great lenses and I would be happy to work with any of them, but in the long run I better use what I got and wait for what I really want when I got the cash.
 
Last edited:
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.

4815006811_4591bf92e8_b.jpg
 
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.

4815656676_7d209319c3_b.jpg
 
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...

Thanks for taking the time to shoot that.
If you are looking for trouble free lenses I guess this says a lot for Canon higher grade. When I invest in lenses it's with the concept to keep it for the long haul. These small flaws will start to grow on you (me) after a while. I think the 16-35L will be my next investment, after external audio and a shotgun mic. Everything's gotta wait it's turn.
 
ROCKMORE said:
Thanks for taking the time to shoot that.
Click to expand...

I was getting paid well to shoot in Macy's. Not originally intended for you guys!
I think you meant 'Thanks for taking the time to post that.' :smile:

I think each lens has a purpose. For me as a indi film maker it makes sense to own the tokina 11-16. And so I own it. I then rent the 10-22 as needed.

Some of the lowlight indoor shots I was doing 2 nights ago for a narrative short film could not have been done on the canon. Not with f4.5 as max aperture for 16mm.
I use 14, 15 and 16mm focal lengths all the time for narrative work.
 
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
 
Last edited:
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.

4815006811_4591bf92e8_b.jpg
Click to expand...

Well, show me the same photo taken with the Tokina also at f4.5 to compare.
The lens correction software in your camera might be also getting rid of the CA in canon lens?
 
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah that won't get passed my client either. Thanks for the post.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top