Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 Pro DX lens tested at DxOMark

Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f:2.8 Pro DX lens review
DxOMark published their test results for the Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 Pro DX lens:

A useful lens in restricted space that’s also capable of creating some dramatic images, a wide-angle lens is a great addition to any photographers’ kit bag and a “must have” for landscape and architectural photo enthusiasts. The new Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8’s increase in focal length over its 11-16mm predecessor makes it a more versatile option that puts it more in line with the wide-angle competition from Nikon and Sigma.

Tested on the Nikon D5300, it’s also the highest-ranking DX-format wide-angle we’ve tested to date, with good transmission and well-controlled distortion and vignetting. For sharpness, it’s just out cored by the Sigma 10-20mm, but the Tokina 11-20mm still offers excellent center resolution at focal lengths using the wider apertures up to f/11. Resolution at 16mm using apertures f/8 and f/11 is the strongest — boasting uniform sharpness results for landscape shots — but for maximum depth-of-field shots, resolution at the minimum apertures f/16 and f/22 is just a little softer.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • FIRST! ….. I’m happy, I guess

    • fanboy fagz

      Were all so proud of your accomplishment. What a feat. Ur so talented

      • Max

        You’re

        • fanboy fagz

          I changed it just so you wouldnt have a heart attck and understand people write abbreviations on the net.

          • Eric Calabros

            Punctuations 🙂

            • fanboy fagz

              nope-internet is international. you the punctuation police? I bet you cant speak the languages I speak as well as I speak english.

          • Zero

            *attack

            • fanboy fagz

              *teasing if thats a an attack whats a joke.

            • Zero

              *that’s
              *what’s

          • Zero

            *Wouldn’t

      • Zero

        *We’re

        • fanboy fagz

          douchebag in full effect mizdayen batachat

          it also goes to show how you have concentration issues if you have to post and repost and repost.

    • peter w

      Alas, you forgot your trousers, uh your message.

  • Eric Calabros

    Even DXO itself knows its score is misleading:
    “just out cored by the Sigma 10-20mm, but the Tokina 11-20mm still offers excellent center resolution..”

    It’s actually better than Sigma

    • Hanudiyan

      Tokina on the left, right? Corner is greener, so it is better. But Sigma’s green area in the center is wider.

      • Zoron

        I only buy lenses with exact consistent center-to-corner sharpness……full green acutance map

        • nwcs

          You wouldn’t have many wide angle lenses then.

  • MSC

    What they don’t mention is that there are multiple reports of bad copies of this lens that have backfocus and soft center issues.

    • Patrick O’Connor

      I believe they report their findings, not those of others. I’ve had two different Tokinas that were both great lenses but, of course, this one could be a dog. :-/

    • Hanudiyan

      Some said that when it’s (3rd brand) good, it’s good. But finding the good one is another question.

  • sickheadache

    They seem to have Poor Scores.

    • Captain Megaton

      Ultra-wide angle zooms. What is good performance here would be considered pretty terrible at any other focal length.

    • John

      If you are looking for a good wide angle for crop, then this Tokina is probably one of the best. The 11-16 was well regarded, and this 11-20 is slightly better. In my own use [landscapes, focus on something far-ish, and around f8] the lens is great.

      Remember these tests are done at close range, not exactly what the lens is intend to do, and real-world experience is not always well summarized by a single number.

      But hey, try it out! Come to your own conclusions. [but take tests with a grain of salt]

  • You can measurebate all you want, The Tokinas are still the *ONLY* DX lenses that go to 2.8 and hit that focal range, and they’re more than sharp enough, so…

    If you shoot nightscapes and stuff, and care at all about cost or weight, the Tokinas make a solid case for forgetting about the FX advantage and just sticking with a killer DX combo.

    My 11-16 2.8 had focus issues and I had to send it in to Tokina to be calibrated, but that’s par for the course for pretty much all DSLR lens makers these days, even the name brands. Not that I’m satisfied with that as the status quo, I’m just saying…

    • Brandon Dittsworth

      Couldn’t of said it any better. Most Tokina lenses are underrated in my opinion. I’ve used the 11-16 2.8 and it’s a fantastic lens for the focal coverage, overall quality and price. It’s a bit of a “tank” but the weight isn’t an issue unless you put it on a tripod that can’t handle it.

      • It may feel like a “tank” on a Canon Rebel or Nikon D3300 or something, but in reality it’s by far the lightest f/2.8 ultra-wide zoom on the market among APS-C and Full-Frame options. The newest Tamron 15-30 weighs over a pound more! It is also even lighter than any (DSLR) f/4 ultra-wide zoom for that matter.

        If you put this thing on a Nikon D7200 or D500, it will balance beautifully while not breaking your back if you decide to lug two of them (and two bodies) into the wilderness for night timelapse work.

        Heck, I could carry both the 11-16 2.8 and the 14-20 2.0 into the wilderness, for timelapse work that often requires me to double down on similar focal lengths, …and still be only a few ounces heavier than a single full-frame ultra-wide zoom.

        In the ultralight ultrawide category, the Nikon 10-24 DX is only 0.2 lbs lighter, I think…

        • KnightPhoto

          Yep at 560g the Tokina 11-20 is the lens that has caught my eye now that I have a D500 on the way, and especially for its constant f/2.8 aperture. And agreed, I compared it in the shop to the Tammy 15-30 which was an absolute brick in comparison, and the Tokina felt like a feather. After years of only looking at FX lenses these DX options are great from a size, weight, and cost. Picking up a couple is nowhere near as expensive as the big FX monster lenses I had been looking at. The 16-80 is likewise a dream compared to the new 24-70E.

          • Yep, my thoughts exactly. The full-frame revolution is over, if the D500 can deliver. Pair the D500 with a Tokina 11-20 2.8, or 14-20 2.0, or maybe the Sigma 18-35 1.8, and you’ve got a knock-out wide angle setup that most full-frame setups can only dream of competing with on price or weight, and yet not really have that much of an advantage in shallow DOF or high ISO quality. Especially when your zoom goes to f/2 or f/1.8 instead of f/2.8 or f/4…

  • Michiel953

    Well, so much for getting a D500 with that reportedly top class DX sensor…

  • Have been rocking this lens for several months now – ended up importing as it seemed to be taking and age for a UK release, even now availability is extremely limited.

    I’m thrilled with the performance. The 11-16mm was always a bit to limited vs the competition for my liking, but this update made it a much more all-round option. I took it to Iceland with me and it only came off the D7100 when I wanted to use my 10.5mm Nikon Fisheye.

  • HD10

    Sample variation needs to be considered when reading lens review.

  • DXO has never tested the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 DX.

    • I have that lens and love it when shooting DX. I find it very similar in many ways to the 16-35 f4 I use for FX. Distortion is pretty bad at 12 though. 15 it starts to look much better!

    • decisivemoment

      I had two horrible samples of it a while back and never trusted it again. Also did not like the distortion signature; it’s highly irregular with a lot of stretching at each of the four points halfway to the corners at 18mm, even as the far outer field at the setting is pretty good.

  • decisivemoment

    Looks good, but I’m curious as to how the 14-20/2 will turn out, despite the stupid filter size.

  • Glambike

    If my Tokina 11-16 allows me to take beautiful photos at 15mm on my FX camera than why do i need the 11-20?

  • Back to top