Hello All!

I have been looking into lenses and haven't come across much mention of the Tokina pro series of lenses. The MTF charts look good (although I am just learning about that stuff), and the lens designs and specs seem to be on par with Canon or Nikon. The Nikon 80-200 2.8 is around $800 and the Canon 70-200 2.8 is around $1350, with the Tokina 80-200 2.8 in the neighborhood of $750. Obviously the price difference isn't enough for me to get the Tokina if I choose to buy a Nikon camera, but if I go with Canon the price difference is certainly staggering. I don't want to invest in a "pro-level" camera only to put suspect glass behind it, but at a price difference of $600, I would like to know if I will see a noticeable difference with a loupe and lightbox if I compared photos from the Canon and Tokina lenses. The same type of price difference goes for the Canon and Nikon 28-70 2.8 and the Tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8. Any help or suggestions would be much appreciated.

-- james (albanyjim1@aol.com), March 10, 1999

Answers

As a Canon user I will choose the Canon lens because of the full time manual focus, lightning fast auto focus and silent operation made possible by the Ultrasonic motor AND compatibility with dedicated 1.4 and 2.0 TC's which allow full auto focus and auto exposure while maintaining high image quality. None of these are available on the Tokina lens. With the Canon lens you are also ensured of future compatibility with new Canon bodies. Recently there were reports of incompatibility of some Tokina ATX-Pro lenses with the new EOS 3 body.

-- Nico Smit (nico@anp.co.za), March 11, 1999.

you're almost not comparing apples to apples here. the canon 70-200 has a USM motor, while the others don't. nikon recently released an 80-200 with a AFS (same as USM) motor but it costs $1500 like the canon 70-200. canon also made an 80-200 without the USM motor. that can be found used for about $700-$800. so... once you're comparing the same lenses with the same motors the prices are all very similar.

$700-$800 canon 80-200, nikon 80-200 (without AFS), tokina 80-200

$1400-$1500 canon 70-200, nikon 80-200 (with AFS)

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), March 11, 1999.

Nico -- that is one of the major points/drawbacks I am looking to avoid...finding out the compatibility of the Tokinas with something like the EOS 3. You hit the nail on the head.

Sean, I know the apples aren't completely matched in this scenario, but that was done knowingly. I like the fact that Nikon has a moderately priced excellent 80-200 2.8 for under $900, as well as the high-end model, while Canon only has the high end $1395, or a used one. For this reason I was looking to see if the Tokina would fit as a "moderately priced excellent 80-200 2.8" within the EOS system under the 70-200 USM.

-- james (albanyjim1@aol.com), March 11, 1999.

Stick with the same brand lens as the camera, especially with Canon, because no question about compatibility and the USM is very nice. I think the USM is a big enough factor by itself to make you stick Canon. I know I will never by another third-party lens again, I am dumb by I learned my lesson quick this time!

BV

-- Brian Vega (vega@micron.net), March 12, 1999.

i'm not put off by used things. 4 of my 6 lenses are used and 1 is grey (only the original lens i bought when i got the camera (before i knew about grey and used markets) is a new, US version. so for me, for the same money, i'd rather have a used canon 80-200 then a tokina 80-200.

as long as you test a used lens and get it from somehwere where you can return it for a month or 2 weeks, used is fine.

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), March 12, 1999.

Sean,

Yeah, your comments struck a chord of reason with me. I am strongly considering a EOS 1n w/booster, 540 EZ, and the 70-200 USM. Right now I am looking for a place that will put together a good price for all the equipment I am looking to get (within the next few months). I am going to try to find a used 28-70 2.8L. Any suggestions on a place that might put together a package of the 1n/booster, 540ez and 70-200 with a little savings? Thanks!

-- james (albanyjim1@aol.com), March 12, 1999.

i've never bought more than 1 or 2 photography equipment items at a time, so i don't have any 1st hand experience.

but phillip greenspun didn't seem to have too much luck with mail order places and package deals (see his static photo.net article on "places to buy a camera")

i'd figure that the mail order places are operating on low fixed margins and they wouldn't want to make a "package deal". you might have luck with a retail store this way, but i don't know that you'd make out any better.

the only thing i can say is call around. but be careful about mail order places that aren't b&h (the only one i use). read the photo.net neighbor to neighbor section before calling any photo stores.

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), March 14, 1999.

Hi James,

I belong to the minority group of Minolta owners. To me it seems that Minolta has far less incompatibilty problems than the other manufacturer.

Futhermore is the Minolta AF drive incorporated into the body and if you read the latest news about the Maxxum/Dynaxx 9 you will notice that the AF speed is even on par with EOS3 and F100.

If you fall for Canon (probably Nikon too) then you MUST use USM lenses (=Canon=$) for optimal AF performance and possibly other vital features, otherwise the money you put into your body is wasted! If you are going to sell your pics, you should better stick to the manufacturer's hardware.

However, I use a Tokina ATX lens on my Maxxum 7xi body without any problems.

-- Marcus Erne (mcerne@evansville.net), April 18, 1999.

My Tokina 20-30mm f2,8 works fine with all my Nikon bodies. It is obviously not as good as the Nikon, but at half the expens it gives very good results. Take a look if you like http://www.photocritique.net/cgi-bin/photog.pl?NICO+MOSTERT.

-- Nico Mostert (mostert@es.co.nz), September 02, 1999.

I have an Canon 50E and Tokina 80-200/2.8. They cooperate very, very nice, but you must realize, that fast pro lenses are very, very heavy.

-- Matija Ponikvar (matijap@robo.fe.uni-lj.si), November 25, 1999.

I HAVE DONE SOME VERY EXTESIVE RESEARCH ON THE PERFORMANCE OF TOKINA LENSES AND EVERYTHING I FOUND HAS BEEN POSITIVE. ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY ISSUE; IF IT DOESN'T WORK WITH YOUR CAMERA TOKINA WILL FIX THE PROBLEM FOR FREE IF YOU SEND IT BACK TO THEM (AS LONG AS IT IS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. WHICH IS 5 YEARS BY THE WAY!). ABOUT AF SPEED; OF COURSE IT WONT BE AS FAST AS USM BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT ITS NO DOG EITHER. IF YOU ARE NOT PHOTOGRAPHING SPORTS OR FAST ANIMALS, YOU SHOULD BE FINE. ABOUT IMAGE QUALITY; EVERY LENS TEST I HAVE READ ON THE 28-70 2.8 AND 80-200 2.8 PRO LENSES HAVE BEEN IMPRESSIVE. MOST RATE THEM ONLY SLIGHTLY BELOW THEIR CANON AND NIKON COUNTERPARTS; BUT NOT BY MUCH. THE IMPROVEMENT OVER CONSUMER GRADE LENSES (FROM ANY MANUFACTURER) IS SHOWN TO BE SIGNIFICANT. AFTER ALL..THESE ARE PRO LENSES. I JUST ORDERED THE NEW 28-80 AT-X PRO (FOR MY EOS 3) WICH I HEARD IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE 28-70 AT-X PRO. I SUGGEST TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SAVE MONEY AND NOT SACRAFICE QUALITY TO GO WITH A TOKINA PRO LENS.

-- TIM LUJAN (TIM.LUJAN@ANIXTER.COM), June 16, 2000.

See for your-self.

http://www.garywstanley.com/product_reviewsTokina300.htm

-- Vincent Quek (vinceqcl@magix.com.sg), November 25, 2001.

As an optometrist and lens manufacturer I have inside information.

Both Canon and Nikon lenses are infact DESIGNED and MADE by Tokina who are inturn owned by Hoya - the World's largest glass manufacturer.

Minolta still make there own lenses.

You can't go wrong with Tokina.

-- Dr Chris Long (chrislong@purpleturtle.com), December 04, 2001.