hello. I am trying to finish off my lenses and the kit I have is not bad. however I lack the super duper wide end. my current kit consists of 70-200 2.8 VR2, 105 2.8 VR mac, 50mm 1.4G, 16-35 F4 VR,and TC-20EIII 2x tele . and a D7000 with a Nikon vertical grip and SB-700. however I am thinking to finishing off the kit on the wide end with the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 DX. I have tried this lens before, my friend has one and it is really a great lens. I may have the money soon to consider getting one new. my only concern is seeing how they updated the 12-24 F/4 not too long ago, is there any info on weather or not they are going to up date the 11-16 any time soon? I think that lens has been out for several years now. not sure if its time for a version 2. hate to buy one and see a version 2 come out within a few months to a year. any info would be appreciated. Thanks, and God Bless.
Tokina 11-16 F/2.8 version 2?????
(39 posts) (17 voices)-
Anonymous
Unregistered
Posts: 10offlinePosted 1 year ago # -
I think something you should really ask yourself is what will the 11-16mm Tokina do that your that your 16-35mm wont do taking a step back or two. I'm not one for using a wide lens. My 24-70 is plenty wide for me and taking steps back is better for me then buying a wider lens. I don't see spending the money on 5 more mm in another lens when you can take a step or two back. Might be better putting that money into more flashes or some other gear. But then thats just the way I see it, for you the 5mm might be worth it. In that case I say go for it if it will make you happy. No need to wait for a new lens if this one will make you happy now.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hello Born_again2510,
I'm commenting here to say only a couple of things - and I do agree with what Niz said above. My story is, I ordered the Tokina 11-16mm within 3 months of getting my D7000 and made the mistake of returning it within the 30 day return period because it basically sat in my bag. It always seemed too wide to get the shots I wanted and I would always crop whenever I'd use it. The widest I have now is the 24mm end of the Nikon 24-70 and to be honest, I've occasionally wished I had wider. I guess when I had that lens I didn't appreciate its capabilities. It is a sweet lens to use especially if you want that slightly distorted, low angle, wide shot.
The thing right now is, if I bought it again I still don't know if I'd use it that much vs. a lens with 16mm at the wide end. With that said, what you should do is perhaps look at your recent photo shoots, vacation shots, and around the town shots. See if you could have used 11mm, or 12mm etc. If not then save the money. But if you come across some shots that would have made you happier with wider than 16mm then maybe it's for you to get.
As for me, I'm looking to try something with 16mm on the wide end to see if it will satisfy me. BTW, how do you like that 16-35mm F4 on DX. I'm thinking about that one because if I ever upgrade to full frame it's as wide as I would care to go on full frame.
As for a possible upgrade of the current Tokina 11-16mm ; the price of that lens was at $719.00 USD for the last several months and it recently has gone down to $699.00. I don't know if that due to weakening sales or an effort to sell off inventory. But it's something to think about.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I don't think you should worry about an update. The version 2 of the 12-24 only added an autofocus motor and basically stayed exactly the same other than that. If the lens already works well I would just get it if you need.
The comments about wide angle. I got the Tokina 12-24 F4 II and love it...it is probably the most fun lens I own. I use it pretty often and I am glad I got it. It depends on what you shoot, but I think it really does complete a kit. You might also consider the Nikon 10-24. I have heard it performs well and it will give you a wider range to shoot with. I know you have the 16-35, but 11-16 is really really narrow...only 5mm.
Posted 1 year ago # -
oops - mistake here
Posted 1 year ago # -
While it's always possible that they will update the 11-16, it doesn't seem too likely. There aren't any other 2.8 wide crop frame zooms so there isn't a competing lens that is doing better, and the existing design is already recognized as being very good.
Whether or not you want it depends on a lot on your shooting and on what you would like. If the only reason why you want it is to finish your collection, I'm not so sure it'd be worth it. Of course, if you want a wide zoom, or would like to try one, it is not a bad choice (my other choices being both Sigma 10-20's, the 8-16 and the Nikon 10-24).
Just for the record, I use it and I actually quite like it. I take the opposite view of many others here in that I would much rather use a wide zoom than a normal lens. If your subject doesn't fill the frame, then you just move up closer, which makes your pictures feel more involved and interesting, but I won't press the point. 5mm isn't actually as restrictive as you think it might be, as at these wide views, there is a big difference with each mm. Comparing it to my slow 10-20, I notice the difference between 10 to 11 more than 16-20 believe it or not. Of course, this is all my opinion so you can take that for what you will.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Just get the present lens. Who cares if they update, the present lens rocks. Besides, sometimes updates screw up a good lens. Witness the 85mm f1.4 Nikkor.
So don't worry about it. If you want it, just get it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Anonymous
Unregistered
Posts: 10offlinethanks for the bits of info. I do agree that in some cases taking a step back will do the trick. because I live in florida, sometimes the sunsets are insane horizon to horizon. and the 16-35 leaves me a little short on all the edges. however my other thought was because I have no computer other than this work laptop I am typing this on(very old and has problems). to get a new Dell XPS Laptop and actually have something to edit the photos in, and stitch a few photos together and get a good wide shot that way. I actually have a brand new still sealed copy of lightroom 3 and I don't even have a computer to use it on. so maybe that would be a wiser decision at this time rather than a lens? I'll have to borrow my fiends 11-16 again and do some comparison shots.
(@Rx4Photo) the 16-35 is really nice. I had the 12-24 F4 Nikon before and traded it with some cash to my fried who in turn gave me the 16-35. The 12-24 definitely had me covered on the wide end. and at most times I found myself shooting at about 15mm. the VR on the 16-35 really works good in low light and have been able to get good usable shots down to 1/3 sec. the main reason I sold the 12-24 and got the 16-35 was because I bought the 12-24 used and had no warranty and I knew it had already been through two people if not more. and the 16-35 was new from adorama with the full US warranty. and after doing some crop shot comparisons between the 16-35 and the 12-24. it seemed the 16-35 was a little bit more sharp overall and had better color depth. (more glass to work with I guess.)I do recommend it for most applications. and it takes great portraits.
finally a a side note; my friend who has the $$$$$$ to spend. just recently bought the "Pentax 645D". he had the D3S (sold it). The pentax is a monster and feels just as robust as the D3S, and about 3 times the size. the shots it takes are incredible and have (by far) more detail than anything else I have seen with FX. and the 67 and 645 glass he is picking up puts some of the Nikon and canon glass to shame in terms of being built like a Tank.
If anyone else has any possible info on the tokina please let me know. thanks, and God Bless.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Anonymous
Unregistered
Posts: 10offlineborn_again2510 said:
thanks for the bits of info. I do agree that in some cases taking a step back will do the trick. because I live in florida, sometimes the sunsets are insane horizon to horizon. and the 16-35 leaves me a little short on all the edges. however my other thought was because I have no computer other than this work laptop I am typing this on(very old and has problems). to get a new Dell XPS Laptop and actually have something to edit the photos in, and stitch a few photos together and get a good wide shot that way. I actually have a brand new still sealed copy of lightroom 3 and I don't even have a computer to use it on. so maybe that would be a wiser decision at this time rather than a lens? I'll have to borrow my fiends 11-16 again and do some comparison shots.(@Rx4Photo) the 16-35 is really nice. I had the 12-24 F4 Nikon before and traded it with some cash to my fried who in turn gave me the 16-35. The 12-24 definitely had me covered on the wide end. and at most times I found myself shooting at about 15mm. the VR on the 16-35 really works good in low light and have been able to get good usable shots down to 1/3 sec. the main reason I sold the 12-24 and got the 16-35 was because I bought the 12-24 was used and had no warranty and I knew it had already been through two people if not more. and the 16-35 was new from adorama with the full US warranty. and after doing some crop shot comparisons between the 16-35 and the 12-24. it seemed the 16-35 was a little bit more sharp overall and had better color depth. (more glass to work with I guess.)I do recommend it for most applications. and it takes great portraits.
finally a a side note; my friend who has the $$$$$$ to spend. just recently bought the "Pentax 645D". he had the D3S (sold it). The pentax is a monster and feels just as robust as the D3S, and about 3 times the size. the shots it takes are incredible and have (by far) more detail than anything else I have seen with FX. and the 67 and 645 glass he is picking up puts some of the Nikon and canon glass to shame in terms of being built like a Tank.
If anyone else has any possible info on the tokina please let me know. thanks, and God Bless.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Anonymous
Unregistered
Posts: 10offlinemy bad, I thought "edit quote" was going to clean up the last post. noob mistake.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I really doubt if Tokina is going to update that lens in any way. I'm not sure what they could make better. The only lens they have updated in the last 5 years is the 12-24 and that was only to add the AFS for bodies without the screw drive. Tokina as a line and company seems to produce a few lenses until the demand drops way off, ends production, and then focuses on another new lens. They have only 10 current lenses and I have only seen them go as high as 12 for a long time.
If anything it looks like they are jumping back into the FX market.
Just my two cents - 12-24mm is what I have and love it. On wide angles the 2.8 doesn't add much of anything and the extra 1mm for a loss of 8 on the other end never made since to me.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I own the Tokina 11-16mm ƒ/2.8 and the Nikon 14-24mm ƒ/2.8G. I use the Tokina on DX and the 14-24 on FX. The Tokina 11-16mm is a GREAT lens for the price. It's very sharp, but doesn't hold a candle to the Nikon 14-24mm. If you plan on sticking with DX, the Tokina is an awesome lens that I'm still proud to own. If you plan on moving to FX, save up and get the 14-24mm. You'll loose a few MM on the wide-end when using it on DX, but that will pay of BIG if/when you make the upgrade to FX.
The Nikon 14-24mm ƒ/2.8G is heavenly on my D3s. But, the Tokina 11-16mm is really good on my D7000s as well. For DX, it doesn't get any better than the Tokina in the UWA category. You can even use the Tokina 11-16mm on FX in FX mode @ 16mm with decent results! I've used the 11-16mm on full-frame several times, with amazing results. It's basically a UWA 16mm ƒ/2.8 prime on FX.
Good luck!
Posted 1 year ago # -
[I had the 12-24 F4 Nikon before and traded it with some cash to my fried who in turn gave me the 16-35. The 12-24 definitely had me covered on the wide end.]
The Tokina is FAR superior to the 12-24 Nikkor. If you go over to Ken Rockwell's site (just Google Tokina 11-16, his page should be the first hit), you can see side-by-side examples of the Tokina and the Nikkor. It's no contest. If you thought the 12-24 Nikkor was a good lens, get ready to be blown away.
Posted 1 year ago # -
FWIW, the Tokina 11-16mm Pro DX lens now being sold with a $40 mail in rebate till March - bringing price to $659.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Niz said:
I think something you should really ask yourself is what will the 11-16mm Tokina do that your that your 16-35mm wont do taking a step back or two...Just one thing, the angle of view is different. So yes you can step back and fill the frame with the same objects but the image will be different. Just as with a telephoto lens you get a compression effect or distortion, with a wide angle you get an extension effect or distortion. To use a wide angle lens to its greatest advantage it good to understand this. If you search angle of view, Wikipedia has a nice example with pink and blue water bottles.
BTW, I love my Tokina 11-16!
Posted 1 year ago # -
born_again2510 said:hate to buy one and see a version 2 come out within a few months to a year. any info would be appreciated.
All I could say is if you get the (current) 11-16 you will not be disappointed. Actually, I can't see what Tokina could possible do to improve it aside from adding an AF-S style focus motor to make it a little faster/quieter. The glass is awesome.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Anonymous
Unregistered
Posts: 10offlinejust received a email form *LINK REMOVED*. Adorama just dropped the price of the lens to $649 plus you still get the $40 mail in rebate. $609 final price. thats better than it was this past holiday season. still don't know. deciding weather to just get a good laptop first. $600 is a little steep for me considering I still have a few things to pay for from Christmas yet. need to sell the TC-17EII teleconverter first, that would help.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Wow! You asked, and you shall receive!
Posted 1 year ago # -
Rx4Photo said:
As for a possible upgrade of the current Tokina 11-16mm ; the price of that lens was at $719.00 USD for the last several months and it recently has gone down to $699.00. I don't know if that due to weakening sales or an effort to sell off inventory. But it's something to think about.
I figured there was a reason for the sudden price drops and rebates.
What benefit is the aspherical lens?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ok, so this thread was particularly well timed. I guess I have to take back everything I said about there being no sign of an update to the lens.
The new lens diagram looks exactly the same as the old one, so I would say that the only change in optical performance might be from the coatings (a bit less flare, but the old one was ok with that so I don't know if you would notice it). Of course, there is an AF-S equivalent and there may be some improvements in ergonomics or build quality (unlikely but possible). Still, if I had to get one now, I would get the new one.
Posted 1 year ago # -
If I'm still shooting my D7000 by the time this comes out, I think my Tokina 12-24 II is getting replaced. :D I only bought that lens because my 18-105 broke while hiking, I was still in Maine for another week, and the one camera store in Maine didn't have an 11-16 in stock...
Posted 1 year ago # -
I will stick with my comment :) They added the AF-S motor, but I left out the coating. Not a game changer if you have a body with the ability to use lenses without the built in AF motors. Plus the price will be more and probably will stay high for a while. The price of the 12-24 F4 II has gone up $50 since I got it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Wow - that surprised me as well. AFS motor, aspherical element, new coating, probably not worth an upgrade but if you don't have a screw drive AF in your body, good update.
I still thing the 12-24 is more versatile - and $500 cheaper.
15mm DOF at 4ft:
f/2.8 = 2'7"
f/4 = 4'2"Posted 1 year ago # -
I was baffled by the announcement too... At least tokina listens to their user-base unlike another company "cough, cough" I know...
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
