[ScooterMaxi Jim]

The guy clearly has a good copy of that Tokina - great shot !!



No way I could part with mine - took me too much effort to select it from 3 that went through my hands

but good luck hunting - there are bargains to be had all the time !

Great job, ChritianRock! Very thorough research. We can all agree that both lenses are very good values for their optical quality.

I do admit that the photo I took off the side of the bridge wasn't terribly sharp at the edges - as my point with that image was regarding maintaining good contrast against the strong light. If I had remembered that I was pointing down off that bridge - I would have supported the end of the barrel with my hand to maintain good registration! That's the rub with the 16-45 - very loose build at the widest setting - shameful (not a problem by about 19mm though). In that regard, Tokina is always a "build" winner.

If only Tokina would work with Pentax on coatings, and Pentax take on the mentality of Tokina regarding consumer lens build - well, the lenses would cost a lot more, I guess.

I'd also have to say that the 17mm AT-X had less apparent fringing issues (CA - not purple) than a lot of WA zooms such as the 16-45 and the 12-24 design shared by Tokina/Pentax. I don't buy the idea that correction is a cure all. So, I'm just clarifying that these two lenses are competitive with each other, and each has particular strengths for particular shooting situations. If you shoot primarily landscapes, the 16-45 isn't one of the better options, frankly.

---

Last edited by ScooterMaxi Jim; 03-18-2015 at 07:00 PM.

[clackers]

If only Tokina would work with Pentax on coatings, and Pentax take on the mentality of Tokina regarding consumer lens build - well, the lenses would cost a lot more, I guess.

They did collaborate on the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135, Jim, wonderful lenses that do have their flaws, but the Pentax coatings and Tokina-style build were great results, as you thought.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

They did collaborate on the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135, Jim, wonderful lenses that do have their flaws, but the Pentax coatings and Tokina-style build were great results, as you thought.

Yeah, I guess I forgot about those. I've always had the impression that they shared optical designs - but the physical execution remained separate. I did not mean to infer that the * lenses were inferior build (other than the early SDM failure rates) - but some of the Pentax consumer lenses (the 16-45 especially) are clearly compromised most by the tolerances allowed.

It isn't as though the OEM makers have cornered the market on quality coatings, either. Samyang coatings are generally superb (the 8mm and 14mm lenses do great against the light).