| Author: | | New Member Registered: July, 2018 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: October 11, 2019 | Recommended | Price: $8.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharpness, cheap, compact, macro | | Cons: | flare | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 4
Handling: 8
Value: 8
Camera Used: a6000, Minolta SLR
| |
nice little zoom, I got it from a fleamarket for 8 Euros.
I have some other Tokinas, mainly AT-X ones but some RMC ( or not RMC) versions are good, like this one.
this is the only one I kept from all Tokina zooms I had.
I had two Tokina AT-X 28-85mm and the RMC 25-50mm but this, the the earlier Tokina 28-70mm 2.8-4.3, is still the best, I tested it against the other ones.
Very sharp on film and on the a6000. It flares, like many older film-era lenses, and they were never designed for a 24MP cam. The macro modus engages almost unnoticable when you go lower from 28mm downwards..
Try it and test it, you will see.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2018 Posts: 5 | | Review Date: May 2, 2018 | Recommended | Price: $15.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Dirt cheap, relatively beautiful bokeh, relatively sharp, fairly compact, images have a nice character wide open, capable general purpose workhorse, works nicely with extension tubes | | Cons: | Non-macro close focus isn't so close, 28-70 range might feel limited, "character" which I list as a pro might also be undesirable softness, lack of contrast to others | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Canon EOS 70D
| |
Saw one of these on eBay randomly and based on the reviews here bought it up whimsically. Was in great shape, after shipping and the adapter to use it on my Canon 70D, it cost me about $35 (came with a uv filter too)--I added a lens hood and cap for another $10. I think I would have been more than satisfied at twice the investment. It's a really capable piece of kit. Not top of the class in any particular way, but very respectable all around. Perfect for the budget-minded photog. Has a really neat character about it at higher ISO settings that I really enjoy, and is serving as my preferred walk about lens. Was really surprised by its macro capabilities, and combines nicely for extension tubes. A few samples:
Macro mode:
70mm, wide open:
Extension Tubes:
 | | | | | Forum Member Registered: January, 2015 Posts: 71 | | Review Date: March 4, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, easy to focus, "A" setting, close focusing (not real macro but still nice) | | Cons: | "A" metering doesn't work right on my K-50, short focus throw with very little resistance could take getting used to for some | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 8
Value: 8
Camera Used: K-50
| |
This is a sharp lens, especially for a zoom. The focus throw is very short and on my copy the resistance is also quite low. You would think this would make it sensitive and tough to lock in, but it's really not that bad, and it works wonderfully with Catch Focus. Since the throw is so short, and the Catch Focus pretty reliable compared to other lenses I own, I find it very usable for tracking moving objects (compared to other MF lenses). My copy is optically and cosmetically near mint, but for some reason metering does not work properly when using the "A" setting on my K-50. Stopping down with the camera controls in Av mode and allowing the camera to calculate the exposure time gives proper exposures at wide open, but each stop down gets further and further underexposed. The displayed exposure time is indeed increasing by what appears to be the proper amount (approximately doubling with every stop) but the results do not match. I haven't been able to figure out the reason for this, but I have 4 other "A" setting lenses that do not have this issues on the same camera. Feel free to PM me if you have an idea of how to fix this.
This is not something that appears to be inherent to this lens model since nobody else seems to be running into this. Without this problem I'd give it a 9 overall, but as it stands, I have been using my Pentax-F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 a lot more lately. While about a half stop slower and of lesser build quality, it is smaller, lighter, similarly sharp across the apertures that they share, and has AF capabilities. Both can do 0.25x macro equally well. I am covered at 19-35mm already, and the wide end of the Tokina is probably the weakest area of its range (barrel distortion), so the slightly narrower range does not bother me. These two lenses can be had for approximately the same price, and the F 35-70 should be easier to find.
With a fully functioning "A" setting it would be a toss up between these two lenses for me, both are very strong budget options in this range.
This image was taken handheld, wide open, no post.
 | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: February, 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 128
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: October 21, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, easy to focus | | Cons: | | |
A great lens and dirt cheap. I really don't use it as often as I should. It is extremely sharp. Sometimes the color rendition is not as great as it could be.
Here's my set dedicated to this lens on Flickr.
By the way, the $40 cost was including the also very good Tokina RMC doubler.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Location: Ramsay, MI Posts: 6 | | Review Date: August 21, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $48.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Sharp, good contrast, Auto aperture, well built and macro. | | Cons: | A three ring circus! Also a bit heavy | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
This is my favorite lens that I own, bar none. The first time I used this lens was on a Olympus OM1n and enjoyed it immensely. When I switched to a Pentax Kr the first thing I did was hunt down an "A" version to use with my new camera; its thorough enjoyment. I was a bit apprehensive using it with digital but wow what a performer. It's sharp and contrasty with nice color rendition and saturation.
What has made it a star for me is the Kr catch focus shutter release that has allowed me to get some pretty good sport pictures with this lens also. To me it has been much more fun to use than the SMC DA 18-55 AL2 kit lens.
I would recommend this lens to anyone, if you have the chance pick one up.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: February, 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 3,757
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: July 17, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $65.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | very sharp, nice micro-contrast, nice colors, auto aperture | | Cons: | MF a bit loose, visible distortion at 28mm | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
An excellent lens for the money--do not hesitate to get a copy if you see one. I agree with the other reviewer who called it "the poor man's Tammy 28-75mm." Very sharp, even wide open, with very nice colors. Capable to produce images with a 3D feel (good microcontrast--as most Tokina lenses tend to have). I haven't noticed a lot of flare. The only optical problem is the rather pronounced barrel distortion at 28mm, which is why I don't use it for landscapes/ architecture. I use it for portraits (with or without flash), whenever a zoom is more convenient than a couple of primes. Bokeh is neither beautiful, nor bad. A bit heavy, but because very robust.
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: June, 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 4 | | Review Date: December 3, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $35.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good range, Macro, Very sharp | | Cons: | Manual Focus (which is fine with me) | |
I bought this lens from a fellow Pentaxian here in the Philippines about 6 months ago who was disposing all his "manual" lenses. It took me about a week or so, before I could test it out, and whoa! I was so surprised of it's sharpness! It was so sharp that it brought tears to my focusing eye! 
Kidding aside, sharpness was constant even at macro (70mm). It has never left my K-7 body ever since, as it replaced my "former" everyday walk-around lens (Sigma 28-70mm UC - manual).
Go get this lens for your collection if you see one! It's kinda rare and hard to look for in this day and age... | | | | | Junior Member Registered: February, 2010 Location: South Carolina Posts: 30 | | Review Date: August 24, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Well built, auto aperture, decent macro mode | | Cons: | Focus ring doesn't have good resistance | |
I got this in a package deal with a Super Program and a bunch of other stuff, so the price I have listed was not just for the lens. This lens is probably much better suited to the late film bodies than to a modern dslr, but it has some good qualities and I really like the focal range on APS-C. I just find it hard to get it in focus consistently, mainly because the focus indicator on the K-x doesn't seem to work well when I'm using it even though I don't have that problem with any of my manual primes. Sharpness, contrast, and color are all good from my experience and I intend to keep using it and hopefully I will get better with it. I would recommend this lens at $50 or under, but probably not above that.
The filter size is 62mm.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: January, 2008 Location: Paris, TN Posts: 3,350
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: March 11, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | A poor-man'sl Tamron 28-75/2.8 | | Cons: | Umm...it's not auto-focus | |
I threw this in a comparison among the DA 16-45, DA 28-105, and Tam 28-75 and 24-135 lenses and was surprised to discover that except for the lack of AF it was definitely a class contender.
Using a K200 @ ISO 200 and minimum aperture for all lenses there was very little to identify any given lens by sharpness alone. While this wasn't a thorough evaluation, my impression was that this lens is very comparable to the two DA's in IQ, noticeably faster and would easily substitute for any of the other lenses in day-to-day use.
This was acquired in a package-deal so I have no idea what its used cost was and I doubt I'd have gone looking specifically for this lens in any case. However, having sampled its potential, I'd definitely consider it a poor-man's substitute for the Tamron 28-75/2.8 in the $70-90 range and have valued it accordingly; it could probably be found for a lot less.
I'd place this in the present AT-X class as far as optics and with comparable build quality.
It certainly doesn't give away points as a general purpose lens on the older non-auto-focus M- and P-body cameras and may find a retirement home on a P3n.
H2
| | |
