Hey SquamishPhoto yes I saw that great save. They wouldn't have won the game without it! Luongo and Ansel Adams are my two idols^^

kanuck, i take it that that is Lou in your avatar. did you see the save he made last night against the Slovaks?

oh, and nikon, tamron, 1.4, great lens, d700xs, EVIL,blajhblubidido, etc....

Hey thats what I did when I went FX I traded in my 11-16 and all my DX gear. You are going to love this lens its wonderful and a true 2.8 lens. Its great around water, and night time star points in particular. You got a great price too! I paid $700 for it new and only got $400 when I traded it in for the Nikkor 14-24mm 15 months later...

Happy Shooting!^^

gratz poster, hope You gonna like Your new lens, and that You gonna get a job sooner than later, if not I have some stuff to iron over my place :)

nikyvee said:
Well, I just tried the Tokina 11-16mm, for a day anyway. I went on a shoot with my local meetup group here in Sandy Eggo, CA, and took photos of a place known as "Old Town". It is the location of the original San Diego town many decades ago. About 20 photogs; great time. But my first, and apparently, will be my only use of the Tokina, as I have already packaged it back up and returned it to Amazon. (Love that return policy.)

Why did I return it? It was terrifically sharp; it handled well; it's well made; it just worked great. But I got to thinking just how am I going to use it? Will I use it very often? Now I probably don't really know how to use it, but I did decide to return it. Even though $600 does seem like a very reasonable price, and I love the f/2.8 aperture, I simply couldn't justify keeping it. I can always get it later, if I change my mind.

But at this point, I would rather save that $600 and apply it towards the now 2010 expected new Nikon lens of 100-500mm. I guess I think I have more opportunities,and desire, to shoot at the long end of the focal spectrum. The Tokina really is sharp, and fast.

Another downside is that it did bother me that the range was only from 11-16mm. I have the 18-200, that while not as fast is close to the long side of the Tokina. I may wind up trying out the Nikon wide angle at some point. But not until after I get the new 100-500 zoom.

I see what you mean. I usually or rather mostly shoot within 35-75mm range. I don't do landscapes at all, but I am interested in doing environmental portraits so the wideangle will be used quite often. I don't really need the 2.8 aperture but it's there just in case. Yes the range is very limited I would prefer to have it go to 24mm rather than 16mm, it would have been fantastic. But ohh well can't have everything. I will definitefely need mid range zoom and a good tele as well.

Right now I am on a limited budget, I lost my job so I have to maximize my money to get the lenses I need. $450 for this lens seemed like a no brainer to me. I can always resale it, and I doubt I would lose much on the transaction if at all.

Well, I just tried the Tokina 11-16mm, for a day anyway. I went on a shoot with my local meetup group here in Sandy Eggo, CA, and took photos of a place known as "Old Town". It is the location of the original San Diego town many decades ago. About 20 photogs; great time. But my first, and apparently, will be my only use of the Tokina, as I have already packaged it back up and returned it to Amazon. (Love that return policy.)

Why did I return it? It was terrifically sharp; it handled well; it's well made; it just worked great. But I got to thinking just how am I going to use it? Will I use it very often? Now I probably don't really know how to use it, but I did decide to return it. Even though $600 does seem like a very reasonable price, and I love the f/2.8 aperture, I simply couldn't justify keeping it. I can always get it later, if I change my mind.

But at this point, I would rather save that $600 and apply it towards the now 2010 expected new Nikon lens of 100-500mm. I guess I think I have more opportunities,and desire, to shoot at the long end of the focal spectrum. The Tokina really is sharp, and fast.

Another downside is that it did bother me that the range was only from 11-16mm. I have the 18-200, that while not as fast is close to the long side of the Tokina. I may wind up trying out the Nikon wide angle at some point. But not until after I get the new 100-500 zoom.

I love my Tokina, I take it everywhere, the minimal distortion, fast aperture, sharpness, and cost is just unbeatable in my book.

It's lacking 3mm, 3 times more expensive and twice as heavy.

The extra mm at the end of the zoom is also redundant.

No thanks.

Regulator75 said:
I'll put my Tokina up against any other Nikkor superwide lens any day of the week.

Really?

From the general consensus people say that Nikon 14-24 is razor sharp wide open. Unbeatable. Pretty much the reason to get that lens.

I am still do do any tests on the Tokina so see if my copy is good.

I'll put my Tokina up against any other Nikkor superwide lens any day of the week.

Go ahead! But I am keeping all the lenses and camera bodies! And don't catch me showing your face around our trailer park anymore!

poster said:
lol
Niko! What did I tell you? Back to the kitchen, and chop chop on that sandwich I ain't gonna say it twice.

@ jonnyapple

I don't really care that much about filters. But I just lost my job =[, so I have to maximize my budget.

That's it! I'm breaking up with you! You are soooo going to miss me! :^)

jonnyapple said:
Even if you don't care about filters, I'd get one for it especially if you're looking to resell when you switch to FX. I've had friends agonize over scratched front glass but I have so far been lucky. Luck favors the prepared...

Definitely. I just meant that in regards to the 14-24. The design of the lens s just is how it is. Nothing I can do about it.

I put filters on depending on the weather. When it's snowing like today, I put a filter on. Besides I alwasy have hoods on.

Even if you don't care about filters, I'd get one for it especially if you're looking to resell when you switch to FX. I've had friends agonize over scratched front glass but I have so far been lucky. Luck favors the prepared...

NikoDoby said:
You are too rational and oh so cheap! I'm glad I'm not your girlfriend :^)

lol
Niko! What did I tell you? Back to the kitchen, and chop chop on that sandwich I ain't gonna say it twice.

@ jonnyapple

I don't really care that much about filters. But I just lost my job =[, so I have to maximize my budget. For now it will have to do. Besides I quite happy that I got a pretty good price on it too.

For the money, I'd rather have the Tokina anyway because it takes filters.

You are too rational and oh so cheap! I'm glad I'm not your girlfriend :^)

Yup, I decided to get the Tokina 11-16 instead of Nikon 14-24. Sine it might be upto a year till I go FX, there's not much reason to get the Nikon and not use it's UWA range.
I figured that I can always resale the Tokina whenever I switch to FX. Ohh and I got it for only $450. yeah my cheapness got to me.