Yes, there is no problem with this lens reporting the proper focal
length in EXIF.
My shake reduction question was the result of an unfortunate leap in logic.
I think I'm going to like this lens.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
From: John Francis
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:30:57PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Darren Addy
I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm,
does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this
lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)?
If it is
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:30:57PM -0400, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Darren Addy
I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm,
does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this
lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)?
If it is doing image
From: Darren Addy
I'm curious... if it shows up in Photoshop as a Pentax-F 35-105mm,
does that mean that it is also misreading the focal length that this
lens is set at (when doing image stabilization)?
If it is doing image stabilization for a 105mm focal length when the
lens is set to 200mm,
The camera uses the code recorded in the data chip in the lens. Having
partially disassembled an FA and an F lens I can say with relative
assurance that that focal length is reported by several conductive
strips that are sampled differently as the zoom ring is turned. I
expect that the
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote:
I presume when you say it makes a noise when I rotate it, that you mean
when you rotate the zoom ring?
It shouldn't make any noise. It's a really sturdy, pro-quality build lens.
It shows up in Photoshop as a smc
I have one. Lovely, though weighty lens. And, yes, mine also makes a
sound when I roll it, like there ball bearing in there. Bought it last
century, and it's still working fine
On 24/05/2012 1:55 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
I've got my first pro lens in this range, but at first blush I'm not
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Derby Chang der...@iinet.net.au wrote:
I have one. Lovely, though weighty lens. And, yes, mine also makes a sound
when I roll it, like there ball bearing in there. Bought it last century,
and it's still working fine
That is good to hear! (Your report, not the
From: Darren Addy
I've got my first pro lens in this range, but at first blush I'm not
very impressed with it.
I'm not sure if there is something wrong with it (it makes a noise
when I rotate it, which I don't think is Good).
Before I send it in for service, I'd like to try the front/back focus
From: Igor Roshchin
Rick,
I was unaware of their collaboration in 90's but knew about that in
00's. But now I see new Tokina lenses that are distinct from any
Pentax lenses. Yet, none of them are available with Pentax mount.
Hence my question: why?
Igor
Just a SWAG, but perhaps a corporate
This is a mystery to me, as well.
The most aggregious example that I am aware of is the Tokina 11-16mm
f2.8 AT-X Pro 116.
This lens was co-designed with Pentax and so Tokina doesn't make it in
a Pentax mount (presumably so a Pentax branded edition could be
produced) yet none is ever produced by
Igor,
Pentax and Tokina collaborated on a number of lenses in the '90s and '00s, as I
recall. Part of the deal was that they would only be available for Pentax with
a Pentax badge on them. The similarities in focal lengths, sizes, formulae,
and features aren't a coincidence.
Rick
Rick,
I was unaware of their collaboration in 90's but knew about that in
00's. But now I see new Tokina lenses that are distinct from any
Pentax lenses. Yet, none of them are available with Pentax mount.
Hence my question: why?
Igor
Sun Jan 29 22:07:21 EST 2012
Rick Womer wrote:
Igor,
From: Igor Roshchin
Does anybody know what happened with Tokina lenses for Pentax?
I very much like my Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2.6-2.8.
This was my first lens for Pentax cameras that I bought with Zx5n.
When Hoya bought Pentax, Tokina stopped producing any lenses in Pentax
mount, and as far as I
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Roman Melihhov ro...@blakout.net wrote:
I got my Tokina 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 today... I'd noticed one thing. K-5 thinks
it is
PENTAX-F 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 lens.
How are you determining this (i.e. with what software)? I ask because
Pentax does not include a textual
Very simple: Tokina 'hacked' the Pentax 35-70 code and used it.
Sigma does/did the same btw, my 28/1.8 being identified as a Pentax
28/2.8 (funny as I shoot @1.8).
The lens ID is given by the lens to the body.
The K5 will NOT itself apply any lens correction because the K5 can do
so only for DA
Tokina versions of Pentax lenses are not available in K mount. The
only way to get the Tokina is to switch to Nikon or Canon.
Also the lens is small enough that there is no advantage to a tripod
mount. It's really a very compact lens for its range.
-Adam
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:17 PM, Tom
I would second that. I like tripod mounts on lenses that need them.
I have this lens and can't think of any need for one. It is small
and light enough that it would only get in the way.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Monday, October 6, 2008, 5:16:03 PM, you wrote:
AM Tokina versions of Pentax
Ira H. Bryant IV wrote:
In Japan, it is very common for a company to hold another company's stock.
That's especially true when one company is a supplier to another company.
It seems likely to me that this is true of Hoya and Tokina, though I don't
know where a person could go to check on it.
If you go to http://www.hoya.co.jp, Pentax is listed as a subsidiary but not
Tokina. Searching the site for Tokina gets zero hits.
Wikipedia and a few other sites indicate that Hoya supplies glass to Tokina,
but that Tokina is an independent company.
Rick
http://photo.net/photos/RickW
---
In Japan, it is very common for a company to hold another company's stock.
That's especially true when one company is a supplier to another company. It
seems likely to me that this is true of Hoya and Tokina, though I don't know
where a person could go to check on it.
Ira
On Mon, 29 Sep
I'll bet these are optical twins to the Pentax lenses as per the Pentax
Tokina joint development deal.
Roman Melihhov wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_415.html
Another yet tele-zoom for cropped sensor Canon Nikon mounts. It's a
non-pentax answer for DA* 16-50mm 50-135mm f2.8.
Well, nevertheless - over the years I have owned some very good Tokina
lenses.
In fact I use a 28-70mm 2.6-2.8 as my standard lens. And I recently had a
2.5 90mm with extender that was absolutely excellent (I sold it abecause
it's very similar to my Tamron SP 2.5 90mm). So, to me Tokina lenses can
You won't find such info. Tokina's sticking to CaNikon these days. No
Sony or 4/3rds stuff from them either.
I had the 28-70 2.6-2.8 in Nikon mount myself. OK lens, but distinctly
inferior to the smaller lighter Tamron 28-75.
-Adam
On 12/4/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well,
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: Tokina AT-X 165 PRO DX 16-50mm and AT-X
535PRODXlenses50-135mmf2.8
Well, nevertheless - over the years I have owned some very good Tokina
lenses.
In fact I use a 28-70mm 2.6-2.8 as my standard lens. And I recently had a
2.5 90mm
Is the April issue of PopPhot on the stands yet?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Joseph Tainter
There is a wonderful test of this lens in the April Popular Photography.
The results are very good. Very, very good. Pentax has designed another
great lens. It is sharp across the board, even
I think I was looking at it today, (though I didn't notice what month it
was).
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Is the April issue of PopPhot on the stands yet?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Joseph Tainter
There is a wonderful test of this lens in the April Popular Photography.
Joseph I really hope the other reviews of Tokina (I don't care much)
but specially Pentax version will be as good as your comments lead me
to beleive.
Pentax needs that as well as we do. Expensive times ahead indeed.
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
, February 10, 2007 8:01 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX
Igor Roshchin wrote:
Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:51:58 -0800
Adam Maas wrote:
Pretty much all the 19-35 f3.5-4.5's are actually Cosina lenses.
Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar and several others all rebrand them
Thanks for the replies. I'll forward them along.
On 2/8/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey gang.
A friend of mine asked me about this lens. She's found one in Nikon
mount that she's considering purchasing. It's the older model with
72mm filter threads. I couldn't find much
Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:51:58 -0800
Adam Maas wrote:
Pretty much all the 19-35 f3.5-4.5's are actually Cosina lenses.
Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar and several others all rebrand them.
Not a bad little performer, especially for the (extremely) low cost.
-Adam
I remember that in 2000, when I was
Igor Roshchin wrote:
Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:51:58 -0800
Adam Maas wrote:
Pretty much all the 19-35 f3.5-4.5's are actually Cosina lenses.
Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar and several others all rebrand them.
Not a bad little performer, especially for the (extremely) low cost.
-Adam
I remember
in this regard? ( this isnt
a question I need answered, this is a quiz to the listers!).
JCO
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 8:01 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tokina 28-70/2.8 ATX
Pretty much all the 19-35 f3.5-4.5's are actually Cosina lenses.
Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar and several others all rebrand them.
Not a bad little performer, especially for the (extremely) low cost.
-Adam
Igor Roshchin wrote:
Scott,
As Adam, I have the 28-70 f2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro in Pentax AF
Scott Loveless wrote:
Hey gang.
A friend of mine asked me about this lens. She's found one in Nikon
mount that she's considering purchasing. It's the older model with
72mm filter threads. I couldn't find much about it via google. Most
of the reviews are based on later models with 77mm
Scott Loveless wrote:
Hey gang.
A friend of mine asked me about this lens. She's found one in Nikon
mount that she's considering purchasing. It's the older model with
72mm filter threads. I couldn't find much about it via google. Most
of the reviews are based on later models with 77mm
Scott,
As Adam, I have the 28-70 f2.6-2.8 AT-X Pro in Pentax AF mount.
I've been using it since late 1997.
It has been a great lense on my ZX-5n.
I've been more than happy with it for all these years.
I am yet to make an opinion how it works with *istDS.
I am not sure if it renders as sharply,
Tokina had two (or maybe even 3) versions: one or two 28-70/2.8 and
28-80/2.8. 28-80 is from their ATX-Pro line (which usually consists of
their best, optically and by the build, lenses). I heard some good
references about that one as well.
-
I've got that one--the AT-X Pro AF 28-80 F2.8.
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Dario Bonazza wrote:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2006/11/21/5079.html
This is reduced-circle, yes?
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 11/23/06 6:52 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2006/11/21/5079.html
This is reduced-circle, yes?
Yes.
Ken
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 10:39:54PM +0300, Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Yes. you did notice this was a *March 9th* press release?
So this 'news' is over seven months old.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 16/10/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 10:39:54PM +0300, Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Yes. you did notice this was a *March 9th* press release?
So this 'news' is over seven months old.
News travels a little slower once inside the
Cotty wrote:
On 16/10/06, John Francis, discombobulated, unleashed:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 10:39:54PM +0300, Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Yes. you did notice this was a *March 9th* press release?
So this 'news' is over seven months old.
News travels a little slower
Seems the agreement with Pentax is paying off for someone, mostly Nikon
users as they get the 10-17mm fisheye, which was all Pentax up till now
IIRC.
Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Designed specifically for APS-C digital SLRs, the new line-up of lenses
include *16-50mm
Yes, and photodo.com lists this as news. Since I never noticed this
website: Thanks for the tip!
On 10/16/06, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 10:39:54PM +0300, Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Yes. you did notice this was a *March 9th* press
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 01:31:39PM -0700, Joseph Tainter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 10:39:54PM +0300, Roman wrote:
http://www.photodo.com/topic_101.html
Yes. you did notice this was a *March 9th* press release?
So this 'news' is over seven months old.
-
Tsk, John. You know
Welcome back Alan!
Kostas
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Welcome back Alan!
Kostas
Thanks Kostas. :-)
Regards,
Alan Chan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Hi,
as Tokina rep said me last saturday at Photokina - the same optics, the
same coatings (sic!), just without ultrasonic focussing. So it's a very
good indication indeed...
Has anyone seen any pictures taken with 16-50/2.8 ??? They showed me
some prints, but unfortunately couldn't give any
Replies embedded:
Hello, list-
IÂve seen some recent discussion on the list about some of the Tokina 400mm
telephotos but have only caught a few of the messages (I usually follow the
list via the archive which only seems to archive a small percentage of the
messages for some reason), so I
Hi Collin: mine is the RMC version, and it is of course manual focus and
manual aperture only, but works perfectly on everything I've tried from an
ME up to the *ist-D. As I said, I have found the glass good enough, having
used it mainly at f5.6-8: you may recall my PUG shot Butterfly Dance
I wonder if they will be oriced differently from the Pnmetax sosters?
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Lucas Rijnders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 16. marts 2006 10:21
Til: PDML
Emne: Tokina shows new lenses at PIE 2006
Hi all,
Tokina is
Adorama carries the Kenko, Tamron and Tokina.
The Tokina is the lowest priced 7 element 2x.
I have/have had the Tamron and Promaster 4 and
7 element ones, the 7 element are far better
optically.(Tamron and Promaster are identical.)
They are very usable but image quality still
suffers noticably.
Don Williams wrote:
Zen would say: If you don't use them is there any difference
to the quality.
I think Zen ought to say if he's a Pentax user first.
Malcolm
It is probably the same teleconverter, that is KENKO MC7. It's excellent. (I
read test test).
I have the Tele Plus versione that is an adjustable Macro converter. It is
excellent too.
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Don Williams [mailto:[EMAIL
On 8 Feb 2006 at 17:09, Jens Bladt wrote:
It is probably the same teleconverter, that is KENKO MC7. It's excellent. (I
read test test).
I have the Tele Plus versione that is an adjustable Macro converter. It is
excellent too.
Regards
I had one of these, the contrast reduction compared with
I had a similar deal a while back with a whole camera
bag full of goodies. I may sell some of it to fund
further gear aquisition. :)
--- Don Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I received, in the mail today (8:00am), a lens
that was posted in the UK on Monday afternoon. Its
a Tokina 70-210,
I saw that one go on ebay... I think a lot of people underestimate the
quality of Tokina lenses. I would go out on a limb and say Tokina
lenses for the most part are as good and in many cases, better than
Pentax lenses when everything is taken into consideration and that
includes build
Robert Gonzales, aka Gonz, and I are testing a bunch of lenses and this
Tokina is one of them. Don't ask when we'll finish the testing, for we've been working
on this project for quite a while, and it is definitely a bigger job than we anticipated
mostly due to the number of lenses (Robert
At 07:17 PM 30/11/2005 , John Munro wrote:
I was involved in an auto accident, and I used it to take documentation
photos with Kodachrome 25. The insurance company enlarged what I shot to
20x30s and one 40x60. I was impressed with the quality.
That could get to be an expensive lens testing
What are you thinking of bringing?
Pat in SF
--- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, depending on what gear I bring, I'd be able to carry it around
for you.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Shel Belinkoff
Hi Patsy ...
Sure, if it's no trouble for you to bring it
Hi Patsy,
Well, if the DS is here, that and a couple-three lenses. If not, maybe a
Leica or two and a couple of lenses or an MX and two or three lenses. But,
in truth, if the DS isn't here, I won't know for sure until much closer to
the date. Heck, I may even decide to bring an LX or a
Just got back from a two-day jaunt to Tijuana and back. Not really a
photographic trip, but I did carry the camera and 20-35/4, 35/2,
50/1.7 and 28-105/3.2-4.5 lenses. With the Pentax gear, this all fits
in a nice, small, light bag. Such a difference from trying to carry
my 10D in a
Welcome back ...
I tend to agree with you, but I've just gotta see for myself. It's not
just the extra stop that's of interest, although that's the prime
consideration, but other factors such as the characteristics of the image
and build quality are also factors that I'd consider.
Shel
Shel,
In addition to seeing Godfrey's 20-35, would you be interested in seeing a
Tokina 20-35/3.5-4.5 autofocus lens at the Pixel Party? It's not the 2.8, but
it's mostly metal constructed, as far as I can tell and quite a bit heavier
than my other Pentax lenses. As far as image quality, you
On Sep 11, 2005, at 11:50 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Welcome back ...
Thanks.
I tend to agree with you, but I've just gotta see for myself. It's
not
just the extra stop that's of interest, although that's the prime
consideration, but other factors such as the characteristics of the
Hi Patsy ...
Sure, if it's no trouble for you to bring it and carry it around. In all
honesty, constant aperture lenses are of greater interest to me, but then
again, I don't think I've ever seen, and certainly not used, a variable
aperture lens. Oh, wait, I think John Celio's 18~35 is a
Actually, depending on what gear I bring, I'd be able to carry it around
for you.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Shel Belinkoff
Hi Patsy ...
Sure, if it's no trouble for you to bring it and carry it around.
In addition to seeing Godfrey's 20-35, would you be interested in
seeing a
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
... 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
Smaller, lighter lenses are preferable, but the extra stop of the Tokina is
also desirable. Maybe I can find one somewhere and check the quality.
Working with a slower lens, if the quality (i.e., the desired
characteristics) is superior, is worthwhile. Thanks!
On Sep 8, 2005, at 8:34 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Any comments on this puppy?
The Pentax FA20-35/4 is very well respected, and one of the best
lenses in its class for any lens mount. I don't know how good the
Tokina is.
I have no direct experience with the Tokina. However, on specs
GD I have no direct experience with the Tokina. However, on specs alone,
GD I wouldn't want the Tokina due to its size and weight.
Specs can be misleading. The Tokina is the smallest 2.8 wide zoom ever
produced, and for the speed and reach, it's quite small.Unfortunately,
the samples I have tried
I have an opportunity to buy this manual focus lens for $300 Australian.
The lens has never been used in prime condition and original box. Has any
one on the list had any experience with this lens, and is it a good buy.
It's an excellent lens. I guess $300 AUD (about $225 USD) is a decent
This one time, at band camp, Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The other alternative is to buy the sigma but at over $1500 Australian its
expensive.
Where did you find the Sigma?
Everywhere I look they tell me they need to order one in from the US.
Kind regards
Kevin
--
Democracy
Wendy Said:
I also used to own Bruce's Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 which I
quite liked too :-). I even bought a second copy in
EOS mount. Now I have neither. They were sold to fund
other purchases, not because I wasn't happy with the
quality of the images..
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wendy Said:
I also used to own Bruce's Tokina 80-200 f/2.8
which I
quite liked too :-). I even bought a second copy
in
EOS mount. Now I have neither. They were sold to
fund
other purchases, not because I wasn't
On 8/22/05, Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear All,
I have an opportunity to buy this manual focus lens for $300 Australian.
The lens has never been used in prime condition and original box. Has any
one on the list had any experience with this lens, and is it a good buy.
The
IR Again, I am not sure how the new lens is compared to the old one,
IR and what is the difference between the 28-70/2.8 and 28-80/2.8,
IR i.e. which one is the continuation of the 28-70/2.6-2.8 design, if any.
IR I was curious about that myself.
See the archives! This is a recuperant theme, and
From: Frantisek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Igor Roshchin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tokina AT-X 287 AF PRO SV 28-70mm f/2.8D
IR Again, I am not sure how the new lens is compared to the old one,
IR and what is the difference between the 28-70/2.8 and 28-80/2.8,
IR i.e. which one
IR I've searched the archives, but didn't find the answer.
IR I might try to search again.
I will try to look up the messages on my computer, if they are still
here.
IR I thought it could be the way you wrote, but Tokina website
IR claims that 28-70/2.8 ATX SV is also in the PRO line:
IR
The original Tokina 28-70 Pro is the last zoom that Angenieux made
for SLR, bought and rebadged by Tokina. Further Tokina 28-70 and
28-80 models developped from there I guess.
Andre
PROTECTED]
Sendt: 21. august 2005 21:41
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: Tokina AT-X 287 AF PRO SV 28-70mm f/2.8D
The original Tokina 28-70 Pro is the last zoom that Angenieux made
for SLR, bought and rebadged by Tokina. Further Tokina 28-70 and
28-80 models developped from there I guess.
Andre
Thanks to everybody who shared their experience and thoughts on
this subject!
Igor
Hello David,
When I got this lens, I had quite specific needs. I already had a
Tokina 80-200/2.8. I found that lens to not really fit me. For my
wedding work, it was too big and bulky to use comfortably - I replaced
it with an A 70-210/4 and for my baseball work I needed a lens that
went to at
Igor,
I used to own the manual focus version (with A, ha ha) of the 2.8 and now
have the AF version. And I also have the Tokina AT-X 80-400/4.5-5.6, which
is also an AF lens.
The 80-200 AF is notably smaller then the manual focus version.
Optically, I liked the manual focus version better.
But
--- David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
G'day Bruce,
I'm already saving for my Christmas present to
myself g. I've been
eyeing either the Sigma 100-300 f4 or the 70-200
f2.8.
I'd be interested in the hear your thoughts and
opinions of the 100-300 f4.
Dave
I'm not Bruce, but I
Is this the current one? If so, it tests less well than two others:
Tamron 28-75 f2.8
Tokina AT-X AF Pro 28-80 f2.8
I have the Tokina 28-80, and can attest that it is very sharp but heavy,
and can flare if shot into the sun. The Tamron is also very sharp,
lighter, and less expensive.
Joe
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 16:45:03 -0700
From: John Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Tokina AT-X 287 AF PRO SV 28-70mm f/2.8D
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does anyone have the Pentax version of this lens? I'm wondering how
it compares to the much more
FWIW,
If you don't want or need AF, you can get either the Tokina SD
or the Tamron SP 80-200mm F.8 Lenses for under $300 in nice shape
used. They are both excellent lenses...
JCO
-Original Message-
From: Igor Roshchin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 5:39 PM
Hello Igor,
Here is a link to some shots taken with that lens:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=14636626
There is a link in there to more shots. In answer to the thread, the
photographer indicates that they were shot with the lens in question.
At one point I owned
On 18/8/05, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
If you don't want or need AF, you can get either the Tokina SD
I used to have the manual focus Tokina 80-200 2.8 and that was a really
nice lens.
In fact on the MX with a winder attached, it was a killer combo :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:07:49PM +0100, Cotty mused:
I used to have the manual focus Tokina 80-200 2.8 and that was a really
nice lens.
In fact on the MX with a winder attached, it was a killer combo :-)
Who did you bludgeon with it?
--
Christopher Oliver, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inside
On 18/8/05, Christopher Oliver, discombobulated, unleashed:
In fact on the MX with a winder attached, it was a killer combo :-)
Who did you bludgeon with it?
I wish it had been the dude who won the auction for the one previous to
the one I won :-)
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
I use the same lens on my Super Program with the winder.
Works best on the muggers if you remove the hood first. Don't want to
crack the plastic...
Works nicely for frightening small children and old ladies. Especially
with the Metz handle flash attached...
-Mat
On 8/18/05, Cotty [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Igor Roshchin
Subject: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
So, I am currently looking at Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO (80-200, f/2.8)
It is still expensive (~$610-$60~=$550), but ...
Related suggestions are greatly appreciated (am I overlooking
other
Subject: Re: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
- Original Message -
From: Igor Roshchin
Subject: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
So, I am currently looking at Tokina AT-X 828 AF PRO (80-200, f/2.8)
It is still expensive (~$610-$60~=$550), but ...
Related suggestions are greatly
G'day Bruce,
I'm already saving for my Christmas present to myself g. I've been
eyeing either the Sigma 100-300 f4 or the 70-200 f2.8.
I'd be interested in the hear your thoughts and opinions of the 100-300 f4.
Dave
On 8/19/05, Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Igor,
snip
At one
Mine has an A setting on the aperture ring.
nelsonHA-HA!/nelson
-Mat
On 8/18/05, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tokina made a really good 80-200 f/2.8 manual focus lens for quite a while.
I think it was an SD lens. Mine doesn't have an A setting, which is too bad.
Optically, it is a
- Original Message -
From: Mat Maessen
Subject: Re: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
Mine has an A setting on the aperture ring.
Is it a nice lens otherwise?
William Robb
1 - 100 of 330 matches
Mail list logo
