Night Landscape Test Shot for Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens
- Thread starter zola70
- Start date
- Status
eugene_nyc
New Member
Nice shot. Considering to get this lens as well. Mind to share where u get it from? & how much?
zola70
Senior Member
lastboltnut
Senior Member
That pic has keystone effect, but not tilted.
Nice lens...I was struggling between this and the 12-24...in the end chose 12-24 for the range.
Nice lens...I was struggling between this and the 12-24...in the end chose 12-24 for the range.
zola70
Senior Member
zola70
Senior Member
If you don't mind sharing your reason why you choose 12-24 over the 11-16? Thanks.
That pic has keystone effect, but not tilted.
Nice lens...I was struggling between this and the 12-24...in the end chose 12-24 for the range.
lastboltnut
Senior Member
I was thinking in "poor man's" perspective. I do not want to re-buy another UWA lens, and I think FF will be made affordable in the next few years. So my thinking was:
If I use the 11-16 on a DX body, I will get 11-16 range (which is 16.5-24mm equivalent). If I use it on a FF body, the usable range without vignette is from 15mm onwards, which means I only have 15-16mm range on a FX.
If I use the 12-24 on a DX body, I will get 12-24 range ( which is 18-36mm equivalent). If I use it on a FF body, the usable range without vignette is from 18mm onwards, which means I will have 18-24mm range on a FX body.
Although f2.8 is really very good, but I have to trade it for a wider range...
This is just a person view of how I would like to spend my limited $.
If I use the 11-16 on a DX body, I will get 11-16 range (which is 16.5-24mm equivalent). If I use it on a FF body, the usable range without vignette is from 15mm onwards, which means I only have 15-16mm range on a FX.
If I use the 12-24 on a DX body, I will get 12-24 range ( which is 18-36mm equivalent). If I use it on a FF body, the usable range without vignette is from 18mm onwards, which means I will have 18-24mm range on a FX body.
Although f2.8 is really very good, but I have to trade it for a wider range...
This is just a person view of how I would like to spend my limited $.
If you don't mind sharing your reason why you choose 12-24 over the 11-16? Thanks.
my take is that WHEN i can afford FF..
the lens will be like a fisheye for special effects
since its special effects that abit of vignetting is ok since it might add to the effect..
hey zola can PM me where and how much u bot the lens for? i got a canon but am chking this lens out
the lens will be like a fisheye for special effects
since its special effects that abit of vignetting is ok since it might add to the effect..
hey zola can PM me where and how much u bot the lens for? i got a canon but am chking this lens out
lastboltnut
Senior Member
lastboltnut
Senior Member
correct me if i am wrong ..
but fisheye jus means a very wide angle. cos a fish's eye can see a very wide angle hence fisheye used to describe Ultra Wide angle lens..
A fisheye is an uncorrected UWA lens. Corrected UWA are rectilinear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens
zola70
Senior Member
zola70
Senior Member
zola70
Senior Member
Just to clarify, this is not a fisheye lens, it's an ultra wide lens and can be use either on FF or non-FF camera body. Well if you're owning a FF body such as D700, you can switch it to DX. Correct me if I'm wrong.
You can find out more at Ken Rockwell's review :
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm
You can find out more at Ken Rockwell's review :
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
