Printable View
I have a question for photographers who have worked with film cams from the 70's/ 80's.
First, if you have used, or know the quality of Tokina lenses I'm curious to hear your feedback. The focus on my wide angle is broken, so I'm searching out a new one.
I'm also wondering about the EXTRA wide aspect. Will there be fractional adjustments with the settings, as there are with a teleconverter? Does the "extra" make much of a difference, or is it just selling point?
Tokina is not a bad brand name, but there's a reason that off-brand lenses (non camera manufacturers) are generally cheaper. I had a Tokina wide angle to moderate telephoto once, mainly because that's all I could afford at the time, and where I ran into a problem was with the workmanship on the element mounts. In a nutshell, they came loose resulting in shifting focus all through the zoom. I sent it in for repair, but it never really worked reliably after that.
A first quality zoom lens won't lose focus throughout its range of zoom. Since that experience I've always bought name brand (Nikon) lenses and I've never been sorry. Yes, they cost considerably more, but they're worth it in both optical quality AND workmanship. Off brand lenses also have a reputation for edge fuzziness, especially at wide apertures. Tokina, Sigma, or Tameron are all pretty much on their own level. Canon, Nikon, Zeiss and other major manufacturers are on a level of their own, but definitely $$ too.
Thanks alot for responding.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDSurfer
I have had a hell of a time with lenses with this thing. Had the exact same problem that you talked about (with shifting/inconsistent focus) with a Sigma. And the edge fuzziness is exactly what I was afraid of. My Macro lens is fine, but need a quality wide angle but the problem is the K-mount. What I think I'm going to do is get a T-mount adapter because I've found a few Nikon lenses that fit those. I've really gotten into photography, so I really want something of good quality, even it costs me.
im not sure about other lenses, but the tokina 10-17 is a super popular fisheye for action stuff on crop body cameras. quality is really nice on it, and i'm pretty sure its the best option aside from getting a non crop body at the regular 15mm (not sure how wide you are talking)
that tokina lens is crap not sharp at all canon needs to make a 10.5mm for there digital bodiesQuote:
Originally Posted by jay cagney
When you mentioned you were trying to find a "K-Mount" lens. Is your camera a Pentax K-1000? You mentioned that you were looking for a lens for a 70s-80s vintage film camera. The Pentax was an inexpensive basic manual controls camera with a good track record for reliability. Not at all like the Canon AE-1 which was plagued with shutter problems. I had a Nikkormat back then and it was a solid performer, but somewhat heavy.
Just remember, that the weakest link in any "system" is where you're likely to have problems. If you put a "T" adapter in there just to get a Nikon lens you're likely robbing Peter to pay Paul, if you know what I mean. If the camera you're using is that dated, go with less expensive Tokina and you probably won't be sorry. Decent optics, and a decent camera if it's the Pentax. These days most manufacturers of new lenses are catering to the digital crowd, so you might have a problem tracking down the "K-Mount" you seek. Just keep a look-out on E-Bay and you might find a bargain. I have a Nikon 90Sx film camera that I never even use anymore, and the lenses I have for it won't interface effectively with my digital D200, let alone the fact that film processors are becoming harder and harder to find.
Good luck in your search, but if you're spending some serious money, chase the new dog, not the old one.
The camera is actually the Ricoh which was brought up in another forum awhile back. To my knowledge it is almost identical to the Pentax your talking about. All manual, and when I got it the camera had only been lightly used by my sister. Perfect condition, I've noticed no problems with the body at all. It is a heavy camera, but I really like it anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDSurfer
And yeah, the mount is the problem. a decent lens will pop up on ebay every so often, but not much. That's where I got a Sigma Macro lens for very cheap, and it turned out to be a great lens.
I think I'll take your advice here, and put the Nikon or Canon lense on the backburner till I get a digital body, and try out a Tokina or another Sigma.
It just sucks quality digital cams are so expensive.
http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q...agney/fish.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by SuburbanScumNJ
you are wrong. this photographer, keith romanowski, uses this fish and has had very many photos published in many magazines
i do agree a 10.5 would be nice for canon, or an equivalent for their crop factor.
the lens is soft i dont care what you say ive shot with it before. I will still stickl with my 15 2.8 from canon on my film body
Yeah if you think the 10-17 is a bad lens you have a poor taste in photography. I purchased one about a year ago after getting some really great advice from Ben Decamp ( www.bendecamp.com ) It really is one of the best fish eye lenses around.Quote:
Originally Posted by SuburbanScumNJ