Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-07-2007, 11:27 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 190
Tokina 16-50 review on Klaus's site(photozone.de)

It is a review based on a Nikon mount version.
Tokina AF 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX (Nikon)- Photozone Lens Test Report / Review

My first impression...

Unfortunately it isn't very good...

This is a very bad design I think after seeing that much of barrel distortions and also very very much CA
And the Pentax 16-50 is supposed to be the same lens design...

Now I am even harder hoping that Tamron is going to release the 17-50 in de Pentax mount...if the Pentax 16-50 is also that bad I won't buy it that way. The new SDM focussing and weather sealing is for me not enough to compensate the bad barrel and CA.
Also the resolution isn't on par realy wide-open.

Maybe some other opinions ?
Or somebody who can guarantee me that the Pentax version will be much much much better than this ?

06-08-2007, 12:50 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 668
Hope it is the same - then I won't be tempted to replace the 16-45!!
06-08-2007, 04:51 AM   #3
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 41
QuoteOriginally posted by Priyantha Bleeker Quote
It is a review based on a Nikon mount version.
Tokina AF 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX (Nikon)- Photozone Lens Test Report / Review

My first impression...

Unfortunately it isn't very good...

This is a very bad design I think after seeing that much of barrel distortions and also very very much CA
And the Pentax 16-50 is supposed to be the same lens design...

Now I am even harder hoping that Tamron is going to release the 17-50 in de Pentax mount...if the Pentax 16-50 is also that bad I won't buy it that way. The new SDM focussing and weather sealing is for me not enough to compensate the bad barrel and CA.
Also the resolution isn't on par realy wide-open.

Maybe some other opinions ?
Or somebody who can guarantee me that the Pentax version will be much much much better than this ?

The review wasnt bad.

Barrel Distortion was worse than competition but it was measured at 16mm compared to 17/18mm

CA only noticeable at large apetures and towards 16mm

Other than that it was OK
06-08-2007, 07:49 PM   #4
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
CA maybe reduced because Pentax will have the SMC coatings.

06-09-2007, 02:30 AM   #5
Senior Member
Branimir's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 145
On OK1000 blog there are samples from DA* 16-50 and I really must agree with that blog about not ordering it sooner...
I believe that maybe there is a difference between Tokina and Pentax variations...

Branimir
06-09-2007, 06:04 AM   #6
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
Hey I was wondering howcomere there's a large number of centering defects and I've noticed a large number of them were in the pentax lens reviews.
06-09-2007, 09:11 AM   #7
Veteran Member
GaryML's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 441
QuoteOriginally posted by Priyantha Bleeker Quote
It is a review based on a Nikon mount version.

My first impression...

Unfortunately it isn't very good...

This is a very bad design I think after seeing that much of barrel distortions and also very very much CA
And the Pentax 16-50 is supposed to be the same lens design...

Or somebody who can guarantee me that the Pentax version will be much much much better than this ?
First of all, this is just one test of one sample. The reviewer points out that the particular sample tested has a centering defect. And these tests are not performed on an optical bench but simply a software analysis of the final image. So lots of other factors influence the results. This review is simply one data point, and is certainly not a definitive verdict on the Pentax DA* 16-50mm.

Second, the lens is a joint development of Pentax and Tokina, but they will have different mechanical mounts and are made in different factories. So the performance is not identical. Popular Photography tested both the Pentax and Tokina versions of the DA 12-24mm f4 lens (using a real optical bench). The results show superior performance by the Pentax lens, especially in terms of geometric distortion at the wide end. So the results for the Pentax DA* may be better (or possibly worse) than the Tokina version.

Third, why would anyone "guarantee ... that the Pentax version will be much much much better than [the Tokina version]?" If you're interested in the Pentax lens, then try one when it is released and determine for yourself whether it suits your needs. If you don't like it, then return it and buy something else. The test results from the Tokina were not too bad, and the reviewer admits that the sample was defective. But the main point is that one should not rely too much on product reviews in making a decision on a lens, especially a review that is just a guy on the Internet. I think there is some useful information on PhotoZone and the guy (I think his name is Klaus) seems to be well-intentioned. But I wouldn't obsess over the test results.
06-11-2007, 06:42 AM   #8
Veteran Member
AndrewG NY's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chappaqua, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 676
This review doesn't sound too bad--obviously expectations and standards are high for a 'pro' f/2.8 zoom. It appears to me that, as many of us likely expected, from f/4, performance is not all that different than the DA16-45, though distortion and corner resolution at 16mm is slightly worse--perhaps this is the price to be paid for the extra 5mm of focal length at the long end. Based on Klaus's other photozone.de tests, I would guess that CA is likely to remain a weakness on the DA* version as it appears to be one of the worst attributes of most of the Pentax glass. Pentax's SMC coating that would be on the DA* version tends to resist flare better than most though.

Yes, Klaus may be just 'some guy on the internet' but in his defense, the reviews that he and others at photozone.de have consistently appeared to be about as good and fair as one can ask for given the price paid. I was very pleased to see that they took up K-mount testing over the last few months.

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
barrel, k-mount, lens, pentax, pentax lens, review, slr lens, tokina, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA*60-250's review at photozone.de. ogl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 01-11-2010 08:24 AM
DA 15mm Photozone Review!! K206 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-19-2009 08:17 AM
photozone 55-300mm f/5.8 review jms698 Pentax News and Rumors 3 09-30-2008 09:58 PM
Notice: Photozone has a review of the DA* 200 2.8 up. c.r.brown Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 02-17-2008 09:40 AM
Photozone review DA* 50-135mm ZaphodB Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 10-15-2007 09:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top