Wayne,
I also purchased a Tokina AT-X 28-70 2.6~2.8 Pro II after deliberations
very similar to yours.
I was impressed with the same aspects of the lens that you are, especially
the solid build quality.
However, I returned mine to the camera shop after owning it for about 1
week and traded it for a Nikkor 35-70mm f2.8.
The reason? MINIMUM FOCUS on the Tokina AT-X 28-70 2.6~2.8 Pro II is about
4 feet! Who wants a 28mm that can only focus to 4 feet? I was frustrated by
this the first time I used the lens. I would think this would also be a
problem for a wedding shooter when time comes to shoot close-ups of hands
with rings, etc.
While I'm not really a fan of push-pull zooms, I find the macro focusing
ability of the Nikkor 35-70 well worth the exchange. The Nikkor is also
solidly built, and pretty firm in manual focus mode. I question how solid
the Tokina will feel after "popping the clutch" several times over the
years. That function appears to be something that will put a lot of
pressure on the lens' inner workings.
I'm sure that the new Nikkor 28-70 would be the best to own, but on my
budget I think the 35-70 is the best bet for all around use in its price
range.
Good luck with your lens,
Jon
>Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:31:32 CST
>From: "Wayne Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Tokina AT-X 28-70 2.6~2.8 Pro II (somewhat lengthy) [v04.n271/24]
>Message: 24
>
>Hello fellow Nikoneers,
>
>I spent a lot of time debating what I should do for a Mid range Zoom. I
>am a wedding/Event photographer. I shoot the majority of my weddings
>with an F5, supplemented with a Mamiya 645 as needed for enlargements.
>In the past Iíve used only primes other than the Nikon 80-200 2.8 mainly
>because I have to have sharp images to be able to get a sellable 11x14+
>image out of 35mm film @ ISO 400. I donít care for the one touch
>zoom/focus ring design, and also wanted something wider than 35mm on the
>wide end so that did away with the Nikon 35-70 2.8 for me. Then I
>considered the New Nikon 28-70 2.8S, which Iím sure will be a beauty of
>a lens, but I have no real need for "S" technology for my style of
>shooting, and wow what a price. So, thatís when the real quest began.
>I have always been somewhat of a Nikon snob. You know the type, "Why buy
>a Nikon camera and put a 3rd party lens on it?". But, about 1.5~2 years
>ago I bought a Tamron SP 90mm 2.8 Macro lens that, by the way, is such
>an excellent portrait and macro lens, I sold my Nikon 105 2.8 Micro.
>Anyway, back to the story at hand. After much research and
>deliberation, I just received (Wed) my shiny new Tokina 28-70 Zoom. I
>donít have the film back yet so, I cannot comment on the optical quality
>yet, but I was inspired to write this simply because of its build
>quality. It has the Nikon-like crinkle finish, an all metal body, and
>feels quite balanced on my F5.
>What impressed me more than anything else was the way it felt when
>manual focusing. It truly feels like a manual focus lens, not "loose"
>like all the other AF lenses Iíve shot in manual focus mode. I believe
>this is achieved by the AF/MF clutch system they use. In conclusion, I
>guess only time will tell the true build quality of this lens, but my
>initial observation is that this is a mechanically a "Pro" caliber lens,
>and that Tokina has done a Stand-Up job on this lens. Iíll try to post
>more soon with observations on the optical quality of this lens. If it
>turns out that the Optical quality of this lens is up to par with the
>build quality, IMO this is a great alternative to the new Nikon 28-70
>2.8S, that is, if you donít need a Silent wave motor.
>
>Happy Shooting,
>
>Wayne Jordan
>Jordanís Photography
>Trussville, AL USA
>Psalm 8:3~4
===================================================
Jon Cunningham
Freelance Photographer
Aurora, IL
Online Portfolio: http://pwp.starnetinc.com/jonc29
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================================================
