RE: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
Hello Colling. Very intersting: Which body have ypu used it with? (I use *ist D And MZ-S) (why does it lose contact - is the contact conection wireing inside the lens damanged and may be reapaired? I would need to have thos repaired - I guess 100UISD for a reparair would be OK. I shoot concert shots in Av mode to ensure fast speed. Thus will I need Av to work. I would probably use it at F.2.8-5.6 most of the time. (For good light conditions I'll use my F 70-210mm). I want shots like this, but at slower ISO (400-1600 ASA) speeds: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/41804846/ Have your ever had it disassembled (my 1st Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8 28-70mm suffered the same, due to unqualified repair attempt(me) after an impact damage. The zoom ring thing doesn't really bother me, as I often shoot 20-100 similar shots without ever changing my position or the subject framing. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 10. september 2005 13:53 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF I got this from a PDMLer, but with one caveat. Then I got the 80-400, so this has sat in its box and I've hardly touched it. So it should go. It's the AF version. Here's the caveat: The zoom ring has some play, so you simply keep it pulled back when turning it. Otherwise it loses electrical contact with the body. As a result I got it for a good price. And I'm going to pass it on for that price PLUS I'll throw in the 1.4x AF TC. $225 + shipping. PayPal preferred. Collin
RE: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF
... I meant of course Shutter Priority Mode; Tv. Camera must set Aperture. BTW: www.Photodo.com rates the Sigma EX 2.8 70-200mm APO above the compeditors from Pentax and Tokina!! Amazing, isn't it? Grade: 3.9 35mm/MF Sigma AF 70-200/2,8 APO EX HSM Grade: 3.4 35mm/AF Tokina AT-X AF 80-200/2,8 Grade: 3.2 35mm/AF Pentax SMC-FA Zoom 80-200/2,8 ED (IF) Regards Jens Hello Collin. Very intersting: Which body have ypu used it with? (I use *ist D And MZ-S) (why does it lose contact - is the contact conection wireing inside the lens damanged and may be reapaired? I would need to have thos repaired - I guess 100UISD for a reparair would be OK. I shoot concert shots in Av mode to ensure fast speed. Thus will I need Av to work. I would probably use it at F.2.8-5.6 most of the time. (For good light conditions I'll use my F 70-210mm). I want shots like this, but at slower ISO (400-1600 ASA) speeds: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/41804846/ Have your ever had it disassembled (my 1st Tokina AT-X 2.6-2.8 28-70mm suffered the same, due to unqualified repair attempt(me) after an impact damage. The zoom ring thing doesn't really bother me, as I often shoot 20-100 similar shots without ever changing my position or the subject framing. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Collin Brendemuehl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 10. september 2005 13:53 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X AF I got this from a PDMLer, but with one caveat. Then I got the 80-400, so this has sat in its box and I've hardly touched it. So it should go. It's the AF version. Here's the caveat: The zoom ring has some play, so you simply keep it pulled back when turning it. Otherwise it loses electrical contact with the body. As a result I got it for a good price. And I'm going to pass it on for that price PLUS I'll throw in the 1.4x AF TC. $225 + shipping. PayPal preferred. Collin
Re: Tokina 80-200/2.8
F I've heard that the Tamron is quite nice (although I'm quite happy F enough with my AT-X 80-200/2.8). The only thing that keeps me from F the Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses is the Ka version of the mount - while F I've found the K version to be quite rugged and foolproof (as in F Fred-proof) to use, I've also found the Ka version to be less than F reliable. (YMMV) Hi Fred, I had the same (unfortunate) experience. The K-A adaptall-2 isn't too good, I had frequently lost contacts when the lens was even slightly twisted. Good light! fra
Re: Tokina 80-200/2.8
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: is awfully big fo carry-around. In that range a more compact f4 lens I find more suitable. And that's me at a full circle. I know of no AF lens at this aperture for Pentax. Except perhaps the SMC-F 70-210 and perhaps the new Sigma with the extra useless 50-100 mm at the long end of it, the eternal reliability worries and the potential of incompatibility with older of future Pentax cameras. Thanks for the answer though, (at least) the MF version is out for me. Kostas
Re: Tokina 80-200/2.8
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Tokina 80-200/2.8 I had the AT-X 80-200 F2.8 MF for a while in PK. Yes it is a very nice lens but the Tamron Adaptall 80-200 f2.8 MF is even nicer. Better build, even sharper but slightly larger. I havent tried it on DSLR though. A friend had one on his Nikon. It is a most excellent lens, better than the Tokina in most every respect, I think. I don't know how it does on digital either. I must say I was pleasantly surprised by the Tokina's lack of CA. William Robb
Re: Tokina 80-200/2.8
Kostas, I had the AF 80-200mm ATX-Pro (which a fellow PDML'er now owns :-( )...and while it is a great lens in its own right (sharp, well built, good AF) etc, they are not SMC lenses, and cannot be expected to perform to the same standards. The flare control on the Tokina lenses though is generally pretty good. Yes, if you shoot without the dedicated lens hoods you are asking for trouble, but unless you shoot directly into the sun, you should not have too many problems I liked the Tokina glass, and only sold mine too buy the FA 200 macro that I bought recently. Cheers Shaun Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: Does anyone use this lens in some incarnation? How well does it cope with flare, and how much does it distort? Does anyone have a pointer so I can understand how many versions of it there are? Thanks, Kostas -- _ Dr. Shaun Canning P.O. Box 21, Dampier, WA, 6714, Australia. m: 0414 967644 http://www.heritageservices.com.au [EMAIL PROTECTED] _
Re: Tokina 80-200/2.8
I gave one (manual focus) a whirl a couple of years ago. It's optically excellent, except perhaps @ 2.8 where it is a bit soft. For the price (often under $200 with paint wear) it's a bargain as it's 99% as good as the $1k camera-branded lenses. I got rid of it for a simple functionality matter -- for me 80-200 is a general-purpose range (not long enough for sports or wildlife and not wide enough for people) and a 2.8 lens is awfully big fo carry-around. In that range a more compact f4 lens I find more suitable. About the only place I made good use of 80-200 was @ wrigley field, sitting 1/2 way between first second, about 15 rows back. Add a 1.4x and it's a more usable range. Otherwise you have to be too close to the action. That's why I like 100mm. It gives me the majority of what 80-200 provides, and then sharper. Next stop -- 300/4.5 or thereabouts with a 1.4x. Something good for sports and large birds (buzzards and turkeys). Collin ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
Re: Tokina 80-200 2.8
On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 19:29:16 -0400, Mat Maessen wrote: H... anyone have recommendations for a decent tripod that'll support this lens, or my Sigma 400/5.6? Bonus if it'll support a decent-sized MF camera/lens as well. Don't know about tripods, but my Bogen 3218 monopod with 3262 ball head works just fine with the Sigma 400/5.6 on an MZ-S or ZX-5. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
