--- [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
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
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
Thanks to everybody who shared their experience and thoughts on
this subject!
Igor
--- David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> G'day Bruce,
>
> I'm already saving for my Christmas present to
> myself . 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 Bru
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
This one time, at band camp, Igor Roshchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 ...
>
> Does anybody have experience with this lens?
> Has anybody used it with *ist DS/D?
> Are there any co
- Original Message -
From: "J. C. O'Connell"
Subject: RE: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
the too bad part is the cameras fault not the lens's.
I wasn't assigning fault.
William Robb
- 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
Mine has an A setting on the aperture ring.
HA-HA!
-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 swell lens
G'day Bruce,
I'm already saving for my Christmas present to myself . 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,
> At one po
l.net
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 ...
> R
- 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 overloo
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 PROTECTE
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) |
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 e
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
__
Hello Igor,
Here is a link to some shots taken with that lens:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=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 t
PM
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 questions
Hi All!
I've been using a Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6, but now I am thinking about
replacing it with a better quality lens. Recently, the limitations of this
lens appear in the images a bit too often.
Pentax 80-200/2.8 appears
Hi All!
I've been using a Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6, but now I am thinking about
replacing it with a better quality lens.
Recently, the limitations of this lens appear in the images a bit
too often.
Pentax 80-200/2.8 appears to be out of my budget
(unless some kind soul would sell it to me at some
20 matches
Mail list logo
