13 replies to this topic

[Aussiebyron]

I cam accross this article and was interested in the results the auther claims: http://www.uwphotogr...-fisheye-review

 

Showing that the Tokina 10-17mm is still a very versatile lens and still performs in FX. 

 

Would the Tokina 10-17mm @ 15mm provide a better image behind a mini dome/4 inch than a shaven Sigma 15mm FE?  Or would a large dome give the best results for both lenses in FX?

 

I would be interested if others out there have used the Tokina 10-17mm in Fx mode and what their impressions ans results have been like.

 

Regards Mark

[John Bantin]

I find it very hard to encounter objective reviews of expensive equipment because invariably the reviewer has put his hand in his pocket to get the kit and it therefore compromised in his judgement.

 

I don't own any diving kit (it's all on loan from manufacturers) apart from my underwater photography equipment of which I have bought loads. Suffice to say that recently I came to my senses and sold all my DX equipment (and my D700) together with all DX lenses (including the Tokina) and now only have D800 with Sigma 15, Micro Nikkor 60 and Micro Nikkor 105. For what I do, I tend to routinely use the Sigma 15 and crop when required.

 

Well, that's what I do.

[vbpress]

Sorry John I've a OT question for you,

why did you preferred the 15 Sigma to the 16  AF-D Nikon? Only for min short focus distance or for other skills?

thank you.

[Aussiebyron]

Honestly John, I prefer a objective review from an author who has actually put his hand in his pocket to purchase items which will be compared to in a review as I beleive that they have more creditability and nothing to loose or gain in the comparison as they already own the equipment.  On the other hand when you see a review of equipment espeically in dedicated subject media like you see in dive magazines you often have to take it with a grain of salt as the manufactures who "loan" their equipement to the magazine/author also advertise in that magazine. If that magazine did a review and basically bad noted the producted or listed the products faults you would see that manufacture remove their advertisement and support for that publication. This shows an more biased review and the reviewer has something to loose due to making the review, especially if the review contains negative remarks and or comments which the manufacture doesnt like.

 

In this review it is not stated that the author "put his hand in his pocket" or borrowed a loan lens from the manufacture.  In this case it looks like the author owns a photography store and more than likely used the lenses in the review from the items he sells in the store. Another example which they have nothing to loose in doing the review. Which to me gives it more creditabilty.

 

The above review does display the images taken with both lenses at different settings to support their objective which also has provided creditabilty for the review.

 

Back to my orginal post John, can you provide any information or answer my questions regarding the comparison of the Tokina 10-17mm and 15mm Sigma FE on the D800 which was the purpose of the post?

 

Regards Mark

[John Bantin]

I bought the 16mm Nikkor but was disapponted to find it did not focus closely enough so traded it for the Sigma 15mm.

 

I like to grab the moment and went from zooming with the Tokina on DX to cropping the Sigma on FX because I find it is the quality of the water one shoots through that is the limiting factor. With fast moving subjects one can get the long shot and the extreme close-up wide-angle with merely a reaction to the shutter control.

 

Here are two shots taken within moments of each other that adequately demonstrates the advantage of NOT having to fiddle with an extra (zoom) control.

 

 

Great Hammerheads move quickly. The first is a 20MP crop while the second is the full 36MP frame

 

 

 

 

 

As for the coruption you mention, Aussiebyron, regarding reviews and advertising revenue, that may well be true of some diving magazines but they soon go out of business!

Attached Images

• 
• 

Edited by John Bantin, 07 March 2013 - 01:45 AM.

[vbpress]

thank you John

by

[JimSwims]

Love that second shot John!  Now that's what I call eye contact.

 

Cheers,

Jim.

[John Bantin]

Love that second shot John!  Now that's what I call eye contact.

 

Cheers,

Jim.

I should have used a faster shutter speed. 1/500 wasn't quick enough for the close-up but it just goes to show what you can get with the Sigma 15mm close-focused! You need to get close to the subject and the perspective on a 5.5m shark is very steep!

[blaisedouros]

John, that second image is extremely cool.  Great perspective on the eye, it's a very humanizing shot.

[JackConnick]

I'm just going to add my perspective.

 

You've spent $3k on a body and $$$K on the rest of the system. The Tokina is ok, Ryan Canon posted some lens tests a while back, but it's just not as sharp as the Sigma. Also at 15mm it's about an f4 lens, as opposed to the f2.8 Sigma. Yes, you can zoom 2mm... John showed above that you can crop just as effectively.

 

You can sell the Tokina easily for $400-450 or so. The Sigma costs $600 online. Why would you degrade a $8-9K system over $150-200 on a lens? To me, lenses are almost the single most important place to spend money.

 

Jack

 

John, that second shot is killer...

Edited by JackConnick, 07 March 2013 - 12:28 PM.

[Aussiebyron]

I've wondered about the utility of this lens on FX a lot, set at 14-17mm. I've seen imatest results that suggest that the resolution of 10-17 is just above the D800, so while it is nearly resolution limiting, it isn't yet. Worth a test, though...

Tokina 10-17 at 14mm


Sigma 15mm at 15mm


10-17 at 14mm Center Crop


Sig 15 Center Crop


10-17 at 14mm Lower Left


Sigma 15 Lower Left


Draw your own conclusions, but I wouldn't run out and buy a new lens.

 

Is this the post you were referring too Jack?

 

I can understand your perspective but the Tokina 10-17mm 3.5-4.5f lens has been the choice lens over more expensive lenses for sometime.  Remember alot of people shooting DX saw that the Tokina 10-17mm being used more than their Nikon 10.5 FE which is 2.8f and more expensive. So having the most expensive gear doesn't mean that your going to take the best quality images its having the gear that works in my opinion not its price tag .

 

Looking at Scott Gietler review I posted above and now Ryans posting from earlier in the year I havnt seen anything which shows that the 15mm Sigma is a superior lens over the Tokina 10-17?  It also looks like the 15mm Sigma requires a large dome for corner sharpness.

 

I am interested in others first hand experience with the Tokina 10-17mm in FX on D800

 

Regards Mark

[ChrigelKarrer]

 It also looks like the 15mm Sigma requires a large dome for corner sharpness.

 

I use the Sigma 15mm FE with a Hugyfot Minidome on my D800 in FX mode and there is no soft corners with f-stops above 9.

I only get soft corners using the lens correction feature of Lightroom.

Chris

Edited by ChrigelKarrer, 07 March 2013 - 08:03 PM.

[John Bantin]

I loved the Tokina on DX. In fact, when I bought my first FX (D700) finally with the Sigma 15mm, I still alternated between the DX system and the FX system between dive trips because I couldn't make up my mind which was my preferred system. However, once I got the 36MP of the D800 to play with, all became clear. By the way, superb as the Tokina was underwater, it was not so good comparitively speaking as Nikon lenses in air. Hence my claim that what you really need is better quality water!

 

My pictures get blown up to large sizes for posters at Dive Shows in the UK. We also have a mgazine art director that likes to crop small sections of pictures, looking for pictures within the pictures, so to speak. If you are shooting for yourself and looking at your pictures at 72dpi, this whole thread is irelevant. Use the lens you've got!

Edited by John Bantin, 07 March 2013 - 09:53 PM.

[JackConnick]

I use an 8" dome with the Sigma. I just think that the overall price difference to have the best lens is negligible in the greater scheme of things.

 

Personally, I'm very happy with the Sigma. I like it with he Kenko 1.4 too, even though everyone seems to think you can crop better, it gives me a little more reach with animals and is about f3.2.

 

F2.8 vs. f/4 is very big for fast focusing as well.

 

I think John's answer is pretty good, if you like the Tokina, go for it. I shot it a lot over the years and liked the results on cropped sensors.

 

But I was looking to get the best out of the D800 system, and I think the Sigma is better suited and the upgrade price isn't much when you factor selling the older lens.

 

Jack

 

Edited by JackConnick, 07 March 2013 - 11:17 PM.