Finally.....Tokina 11-16 lens!

After over a month of trying to decide between the Tokina 12-24 and the new Tokina 11-16 (and even the Canon 10-22), I made a final decision! Some of you may have seen my post in the Help forum Monday. I purchased the 11-16 last week and the first time I took it out I didn't get one good shot - a few were okay, but most were extremely over-exposed. I was almost ready to send it back, but after many suggestions, I checked the connections, changed a few settings and tried it out again yesterday and am quite pleased. I think I must have accidently set something on my camera that caused the problem. These were shot in aperture priority.

Let me just add that it was a tough decision as the Tokina 12-24 is tack sharp, too. However my decision was based on the constant f/2.8 and the extra 1mm.

Straight out of camera, no post processing. Honest opinions please!

Liz

11mm - f/8 - 1/250 - ISO 100
http://mariaimage.smugmug.com/photos...03_VJewo-L.jpg

11mm - f/8 - Tv 1/250 ISO 100
http://mariaimage.smugmug.com/photos...48_AaZv5-L.jpg

16mm - f/13 - 1/100 - ISO 100
http://mariaimage.smugmug.com/photos...87_KbnyK-L.jpg

Here is the link to some full resolutions pics in gallery. Appreciate your input.

http://gallery.photographyreview.com...&ppuser=233961

Glad you finally got the lens figured out Liz. These look pretty good.

Tack sharp. Beautiful exposure.

I hope this lens gives you hours and hours of pleasure and we get to share in seeing the results.

Looking good to me. Glad you got it figured out.
I'm having a psychic moment and think John's going to ask you to do a review.

Thanks Mike, Don and OT!

It's very close to the Tokina 12-24 except for the 2.8 and the 1mm gives you a bit more width.

Liz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frog

I'm having a psychic moment and think John's going to ask you to do a review.

---

That's my job :D

These look good, Liz. sharp and contrasty, similiar to the quality you showed us from the 12- 24mm.
I can't wait to read your review . . .

I've been following all of your posts about your lens adventures.

I'm so happy to see it is working beautifully for you!

Liz-
I'd like to see some high-res images and some more variety. Also, what do you think of the image quality compared to the Tokina 12-24 and the Canon 10-22mm lenses?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

Liz-
I'd like to see some high-res images and some more variety. Also, what do you think of the image quality compared to the Tokina 12-24 and the Canon 10-22mm lenses?

---

John,

I uploaded a few images - either 4 or 5 I forgot. They were uploading for about 25 minutes. Now I can't find them. They aren't in my gallery.

I'll be out for a little while - and check back when I return home.

Liz

As John suggested, I was able to upload some full res images in the gallery if anyone is interested. Comments welcome.

http://gallery.photographyreview.com...&ppuser=233961

Liz

Thanks Gary, Frog and Jeta,

I appreciate your comments. Since I sold my heavier lenses last year and only have 2 lenses left, the Canon 28mm/f1.8 and 50mm/f1.8, getting a new zoom (however small 11-16) was a big deal - especially my first UWA. :D Using an ultra wide is a learning experience - at least for me.

Liz

Liz-
Finally had a chance to take a good look. I think it looks pretty good. I see a bit of softness in the corners. But I'm working to find it. And it's only weird where stuff isn't in focus. I did see some chromatic abberation (purple fringing) in the closer image of the street corner. It was in the leaves at the upper right. Again, no big deal, considering that's the only place I saw it. Backlit trees is a good way to test for chromatic abberation. And sometimes it's the camera sensor and not the lens. You'd have to shoot the same subject with two lenses to test.

Overall, I think it looks great. Sometimes you have to give up a little for the angle. And you also need to learn to shoot with super wide lenses. You have to get closer and composition is a little different. Look for the dramatic. That's what they're good for!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

Liz-
Finally had a chance to take a good look. I think it looks pretty good. I see a bit of softness in the corners. But I'm working to find it. And it's only weird where stuff isn't in focus. I did see some chromatic abberation (purple fringing) in the closer image of the street corner. It was in the leaves at the upper right. Again, no big deal, considering that's the only place I saw it. Backlit trees is a good way to test for chromatic abberation. And sometimes it's the camera sensor and not the lens. You'd have to shoot the same subject with two lenses to test.

Overall, I think it looks great. Sometimes you have to give up a little for the angle. And you also need to learn to shoot with super wide lenses. You have to get closer and composition is a little different. Look for the dramatic. That's what they're good for!

---

Thank you, John. I appreciate your mini review. I noticed the CA also, but agree that it's not a big deal. My 12-24 shots were definitely sharper, but I wouldn't consider this one soft either. I've compared the results from both lenses at 11mm & 12mm. I really don't see there is THAT much of a difference actually. For some reason with the Canon 10-22, there seems to be a much bigger difference between 10 & 11mm. I don't think the 12-24 has any CA problem.

You are correct - for me the UWA is definitely a learning experience. I did experiment with a few closer shots trying to get a different affect with one flower as the subject and other flowers in the further background. The first try wasn't so great. I need to practice. Of course the wind blowing was giving me a challenge.

I'm going to give it a few more tests. I'm still a bit concerned about the poor results on most of the shots I got on Sunday. I want to be sure it's not a lens problem even though the 2nd set of images look fine.

Comparing:
Tokina 11-16 to 12-24
1mm difference wide end - 8mm on long end
11-16 - Aperture 2.8 vs 4.0
11-16 - Slight CA & softness in corners - 12-24 no CA & not soft in corners

Thanks again.
Liz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liz

For some reason with the Canon 10-22, there seems to be a much bigger difference between 10 & 11mm.

---

Unlike telephotos, with super wides, every degreee is going to make a bigger difference. So it sounds like the difference between 10 and 11 degrees is very apparent. I do know I really liked the Canon at the full 10mm wide end of the zoom. I miss that.

Another thing I noticed with your samples and forgot to mention, is that straight lines stayed pretty straight. That's very good with a lens this wide. There is a bit of curve in the photo of the door. But in the others I didn't really notice any curve. In this respect, the Canon may be better. I don't recall there being any obviously curved lines - even at 10mm.