Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Third-Party Pentax Lenses - Reviews and Database » Tokina Lenses » Zoom Lenses
Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8 Review RSS Feed

Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8

Sharpness 
 7.8
Aberrations 
 6.8
Bokeh 
 7.3
Handling 
 9.0
Value 
 8.0
Focusing 
 9.0
Reviews Views Date of last review
7 58,761 Tue February 15, 2022
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
100% of reviewers $106.50 7.86
Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8

Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8 Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8
supersize
Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8
supersize
Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8
supersize

Description:
coverage: Full frame
max. aperture: 2.8
min. aperture: 22
focal range: 24 - 40 mm
elements/group: 17/13
angle of view: 84'-565'
aperture blades: 9
minimum focus distance: 400 mm
filter rotate when focusing: No
filter rotate when zooming: No
filter diameter: 72 mm
weight: 520 g
color: black
Mount Type: Pentax KAF2/KAF (screwdrive AF)
Price History:



Add Review of Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8
Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-7 of 7
Site Supporter

Registered: June, 2021
Location: Ogden, UT
Posts: 54
Review Date: February 15, 2022 Recommended | Price: $99.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Well built, smooth operation, solid feel
Cons: Aberrations wide open
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 5    Bokeh: 6    Handling: 8    Value: 8    Camera Used: K10D & K-3 ii    Focusing: 9   

I own a pile of manual lenses, two A lenses, and two automatic lenses. I really like this lens (After MANY struggles with 23mm primes that were garbage wide open.

This lens hasn't left my camera (K10D until last week, now K-3 ii) since I got it last week. Overall the images have been wonderful as long as I don't wind it down to 24mm and crank the f-stop all the way open. I could be that most of my lenses have cost me less than $50 on average, but this lens just "feels" good when using it. Focus is butter smooth, zooming back and forth are flawless, and it seems to handle most conditions I shoot in well (walking around town, hiking, and making my pets nervous).

It is a pretty heavy lens, but I like the feel of a heavy lens. Reminds me of my early days in the 80s and the first time I got to use quality gear.

If you don't mind manual focus then this lens is a winner.
   
Forum Member

Registered: January, 2021
Posts: 86
Review Date: April 18, 2021 Recommended | Price: $95.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Uniform sharpness, easy to work with (except the stupid hood)
Cons: Behaviour when shooting near the sun, stupid hood
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 6    Handling: 8    Value: 8    Camera Used: K-x, K-S1, SuperA   

(Sold in autumn 2015, so this is based on some moderately distant memories).

It is a manual focus lens. My copy had 7 aperture blades, the focus throw is approx. 120 degrees, and the length is 77.5mm.


Sharpness:
Not super sharp, but very even across the frame on APS-C from f/4; sweetest from f/5.6 to f/8.

Though obviously 35mm film scans at ~3084 x 2048 are not at a comparable resolution to APS-C digital, it looks sharp edge-to-edge with only occasionally the corners letting it down. The area affected is largest at the widest focal lengths and rapidly reduces to a sliver as zoomed-in.


Aberrations:
- Yellow colour-cast when comparing same subject with different lens
- barely detectable CA
- barrel distortion at wide end
- less contrast wide open
- blue hotspot shooting near the sun

Most of these are minor and didn't really bother me. Furthermore, these can be largely mitigated in the digital age: favour Picture Controls that don't enhance yellow, use the correction tools in your photo app for CA and distortion, etc.

The blue hotspot particularly seemed to affect some of my film shots - it's possible I learnt from that and took more care on digital. I think I attributed it to the flat rear element of the lens making reflections possible. A modern flower/petal design of lens shade would probably help.


Bokeh:
Wide open shooting is not my style.


Handling:
Manipulating the lens was very pleasant: being two-touch there's no fear of zoom-creep, and the rings were exquisitely smooth. It's a manual focus lens: focusing manually is a breeze, with a focus throw of 120 degrees. I don't recall if I used any filters or what vignetting they might cause, but the lens hood permits good access.

So what makes me mark it down? The way the front is so much wider than the barrel and how the lens hood exaggerates this even further. Is it fair to mark a lens down for it's hood? I don't know, but really it is a p.i.t.a to stow, being just short of 10cm wide. Seriously, consider getting a different shade, particularly if you're on a crop sensor.


Recommended?
Yes, so long as you prepare for the downsides I've listed.
   
Veteran Member

Registered: July, 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,520
Review Date: July 16, 2013 Recommended | Price: None indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Build, speed, handling, compactness
Cons: Contrast, marginal coatings
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 10    Value: 9   

This lens is fine for shooting RAW and for video. Yes, it has a yellow cast, and some would think its resolution is not good. This is entirely contrast related. Shot in RAW, correcting for color and contrast you can achieve magnificent results. Obviously a bit of an odd-ball, I think of it as simply a "normal" lens in digital sensor crop (36-60mm) that allows for perfect framing. Yes, it has significant barrel distortion on the wide end, but this is also easy to correct with most software converters.

This lens is especially good for interview style video on a tripod as the additional crop factor involved (on the K-01, K-30, etc.) allows for pleasing, minor framing changes with its quiet zoom ring, and totally quiet and smooth focus with a nice, long throw. Low contrast in video actually is an attribute, especially if it is used for an interview-type video.

Coatings work poorly against the light. The lens would be less useful for anyone who shoots only JPGs.

I probably paid around $200 for the lens when new, but don't recall as that was long ago.
   
New Member

Registered: December, 2012
Posts: 21
Review Date: February 11, 2013 Recommended | Price: $140.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: build quality; fast;
Cons: slight unsharp edges
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 10    Value: 7   

I bought this lens some 10yrs ago, hence the price.
I was impressed about its buuild: teflon bearings (supersmooth zooming and focusing), metal tubus. A mechanical marvel.
I had it in Pentax-A version and used it thoroughly on my LX and SuperA.
Because of the weight, I bought afterwards an old smc-m 3,5/24-35. Well, its colours were so much poignant (in fact, the AT-X had a slight yellowish cast on my slides) than the Tokina's, that I sold it away.
I made though superb photos (thanks to its fastness and extremely easy focus) behind-the doors during fashion shows.
   
Pentaxian

Registered: December, 2007
Location: In the most populated state... state of denial
Posts: 1,851
Review Date: July 14, 2011 Recommended | Price: $50.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Luminosity, IQ, bokeh
Cons: Weight, Distorsion, flare

I got mine with OM mount and after surgery it works in the Pentaxes as stop-down lens.

With 14 glass elements it is heavy as a brick! but built also like one!
Metal and plastic in harmony so no worries.

Nice lens with excellent IQ. Distortion in the whole range is noticeable but does not bother me.
Flare is present, so a shade is needed to prevent it.
In DSLRs works fine, and gives nice images.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: February, 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 527
Review Date: March 14, 2011 Recommended | Price: $180.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Fast, Beautiful, sharp, nice feel
Cons: Noticeable distortion, flare issues, vignetting

I owned this lens for almost 15 years and finally sold it. Most of my experience with the lens was on film bodies. First of all this is a beautiful lens to focus, very nice manual feel, very well built. It is a very nice looking lens too,And it is very sharp.

The disadvantages of this lens were first that there was very noticeable distortion on the edges when shot wide open at 24mm. I suspect this isn't as bad an issue with a digital body when it is cropped off. It certainly had flare issues too. I had to use an ultra slim polarizer on it and couldn't use a hood at all or I got very serious vignetting. The vignetting issues likely aren't as much trouble on a digital body however.

It's a nice lens. I have the focal length covered with other lenses so I no longer used it.
   
Pentaxian

Registered: June, 2008
Location: DFW Texas and Michigan - I commute :)
Posts: 1,012
Review Date: July 13, 2010 Recommended | Price: $75.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: sharp, easy to focus, constant 2.8
Cons: very limited range

Manual focus lens that is surprising easy to focus even with the stock screen in my DS and K20d. Images appear crisp with good color saturation. My copy came in the original case which appears to be either leather or pseudo-leather. So far I've used this lens primarily for some landscapes and have been quite pleased with the results.
Add Review of Tokina AT-X 24-40mm F2.8



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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