Reviews and Problems with Tokina AT-X 116 Pro DX AF 11-16mm f/2.8
Showing 1-10 of 40
Peets, B&H Photo
31 July 2014
Excerpt: I have this lense since 3 weeks. I like the wide angle, but I am little bit disappointed about the bokeh. I expected better images. Anyway, for that price I would still recommend this lense for landscape photography.
Summary: Extra-wide and extra-fast (for this price), this lens fills an undeniable need. But I have mixed feelings about this lens. My comments are based on use with a Sony a55. This lens confuses the camera's autofocus like no other. Change your focus area from wide to spot, or the autofocus will be far off. Even set to spot, focus will be iffy. This lens is heavy and quite large.
Soft wide open, nearly useles in low light, good in bright light
8 June 2014
Summary: I found this lens to be a little soft. Even though it is f2.8 it is nearly useless in low light. I shoot lots of accident scenes for our fire co and wide open is not the best. In better light it does ok. I do not use it as much as I thought I would.
Excerpt: I used the product outdoors and indoors for last month with new Canon T5i Camera. The things I like about the lens: Construction - feels sturdy Focus Ring is smooth Auto-focus/Manual focus option on front ring (good in theory, though Auto-focus does not actually work well with camera, all focus points are not engaged Things I did not like: Auto-focus does not work well on Canon t5i Flash does not work unless you are about 3m (10 feet) from the subject Vignetting with UV...
Summary: Used this on a Canon 70D b/c I wanted to be able to get some tighter shots. While this did allow for it, the distortion was too much for me. Seemed to have a very soft focus and not a fan of the focal ring also doubling as the switch for AF/MF, felt very cheap.
Excerpt: Pretty good lens, sharp, a bit slow focus, but an excelent choice for crop cameras. The bad part is is REALLY prone to flares. This is well known and it is something that you NEED to take into account when buying it. Are you planning to buy it to landscape photography? Then you may need to think twice. Are you going to use it for indoor or astrophotography?
Pros: Consistent Output, Durable, Sharp, Strong Construction
Excerpt: I really like the lens its solo wide and great for video, but i couldn't make it a sharp as people talk about all the time. I am having pretty hard time to get the sharp images that why i return it and I'm saving up to get the 17-55 f2.8 canon.
Good but your forced to deal with the quarks because of the lack of options by others.
3 February 2014
Summary: Disclaimer : i've only been shooting with a dslr for just over a year. I'm still learning and teaching myself. In NO shape or form would i classify myself as someone with a professional level of understanding photography, BUT i'm better then your avg person.. ;) With anything, you can find a reason to pick at it, and for this lens, with some of the quarks, i feel that most people give it a better rating simply because there isn't a single option out for the Sony Mount...
Excerpt: Originally I bought this lens intending it for event, landscape, and architectural photography--however, I found the range too wide for my taste and the distortion at the 11mm end too noticeable. It's a good lens at the 16mm end, and very fun to experiment with, but in the end ultrawide was simply too wide for me.