Tokina 80-200 828 ATX Pro f/2.8

[sinus123]

Hi yee,

Need some feedbacks about this lens cause I might be buying it from a fellow clubsnapper. Condition can say tip-top, owned less than a year (since last Sept) and still got 1 year plus warranty (2years warranty).

Got to go with this lens currently as me on a budget...$700 seems ok ok... Was quoted $970 brand new at MS or else wait half more year and buy something better?... any other better stuff???

Any comments and where can I see sample picts with this lens? Me tried the lens but alas, it was evening... lighting not so good, hand held... no tripod...

Last but not least, how come this seems to be the cheapest prime telephoto lens as compared with Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM and Nikon(no need to say liao :bigeyes: ) Any other cheapo range of prime telephoto lens???

Kam Sia in advance.... P plate photographer UC...

Rgds
Sunny

 

[Clown]

prime telephoto? nope.. it's a zoom. pls dun mix primes and zooms up.

anyway basically it's a nice piece of budget glass to have.
it's built like a tank, gives sharp image with low chromatic abberation, relatively easy on the pocket, and it's a 2.8 lens.
on the down side, the AF is slow compared to the sigma cuz the sigma has got HSM, but at the price you're paying you really shouldnt whine. =)

personal irks about this lens: the tripod collar has some really weird stop-angles. the clicks are not set at 90 degrees but at odd angles. and although it has a AF/MF clutch thingie, u have to manually change the AF/MF selection on the camera body as well. thus i feel it makes the clutch implementation moot.

bottomline: u get what u pay for. a no frills 80-200 2.8 lens that can double up as a dumbbell.

 

[clive]

prime telephoto? nope.. it's a zoom. pls dun mix primes and zooms up.

anyway basically it's a nice piece of budget glass to have.
it's built like a tank, gives sharp image with low chromatic abberation, relatively easy on the pocket, and it's a 2.8 lens.
on the down side, the AF is slow compared to the sigma cuz the sigma has got HSM, but at the price you're paying you really shouldnt whine. =)

personal irks about this lens: the tripod collar has some really weird stop-angles. the clicks are not set at 90 degrees but at odd angles. and although it has a AF/MF clutch thingie, u have to manually change the AF/MF selection on the camera body as well. thus i feel it makes the clutch implementation moot.

bottomline: u get what u pay for. a no frills 80-200 2.8 lens that can double up as a dumbbell.

clown-san basically sums it up :thumbsup: if u can stretch ur budget some more then can consider the nikkor 2-touch AF 80-200/2.8. if u need to stick to ur budget then the tokina will still serve u fine n faithful =)

 

[swimcraze]

for $700, i think you can get a nikon 80-200 f/2.8 one touch lens.
optics is anytime more superior than the third party lens...

 

[Tetrode]

for $700, i think you can get a nikon 80-200 f/2.8 one touch lens.
optics is anytime more superior than the third party lens...

Plus the resale value will hold better with the Nikkor than with a Tokina.

 

[swimcraze]

lookie lookie.....all the nightbirds hanging out in the nikon forum at 1 am!!!!

 

[Clown]

Plus the resale value will hold better with the Nikkor than with a Tokina.

nah.. resale value of the tokina is stuck at 700+- 50

if you get a 1-touch nikkor, you get no tripod collar, thus adding stress to your mount.
and the 1-touch is likely to be an old lens, which may have alignment problems or a worn out mount or a broken aperture lever.
the 1-touch sells for about 650 - 780 nowadays and they are all over the place. nobody's buying them.. why?

 

[Tetrode]

if you get a 1-touch nikkor, you get no tripod collar, thus adding stress to your mount.

You do make an excellent argument there. One can add on a tripod collar but at a cost. One might be lucky and come across one that already has one but chances are slim.

and the 1-touch is likely to be an old lens, which may have alignment problems or a worn out mount or a broken aperture lever.?

What a load of bull crap this is! You make it sound as if almost every 1 touch out there has had the **** kicked out of it. There are ones in excellent to mint condition to be had in that price range.

the 1-touch sells for about 650 - 780 nowadays and they are all over the place. nobody's buying them.. why?

Because, ppl prefer buying a used 2 touch for $1200 or thereabouts! The fact is, the 1 touch 80-200 has held it's value for years now. Try getting rid of the Tokina in a year or two for $700.

 

[Clown]

You do make an excellent argument there. One can add on a tripod collar but at a cost. One might be lucky and come across one that already has one but chances are slim.

find one and tell me the cost. probably enough to get a 2-touch already.

What a load of bull crap this is! You make it sound as if almost every 1 touch out there has had the **** kicked out of it. There are ones in excellent to mint condition to be had in that price range.

bull crap? give me evidence to justify my statement as crap.
look here.
the 2 models of 1-touch 80-200 af:

1) 1988-1992: AF, 16/11 elements,1,280g, 176mm long, f/32 minimum, 3 position focus limiter

2) 1993-1997: AF-D,16/11 elements, 1,300g, 187mm long

any 1-touch is at least 6-7 years old already. but of course there are people who baby their lenses and keep them mint but have you seen the conditions of the ones on sale?

even if you can find a mint one, it still creeps like mad.

and can you please mind your language? the asterisks are no excuse for your lack of control in your language.

Because, ppl prefer buying a used 2 touch for $1200 or thereabouts! The fact is, the 1 touch 80-200 has held it's value for years now. Try getting rid of the Tokina in a year or two for $700.

2nd hand 2-touch prices stand about 950-1100 and are hard to find 2nd hand. so logically, if the 1-touch out-performs the tokina by such a wide margin, why arnt ppl grabbing the 1-touch instead of settling for a tokina? i dont see as many tokinas as the 1-touch in the open market really.

secondly, the tokina has stood at this price for quite some time.. do a little search in the buy/sell forum and see. the price hasnt dropped any bit for 2 years.

 

[Tetrode]

find one and tell me the cost. probably enough to get a 2-touch already.

Pls read what I wrote, I wrote that you made an excellent argument regarding the collar thing and that getting one with a collar was slim.

bull crap? give me evidence to justify my statement as crap.
look here..

In your original statement, you made it sound as though it was hard to find a one touch that wasn't misaligned, worn or had a broken aperture lever. So that statement is crap.

even if you can find a mint one, it still creeps like mad.

This was not part of your original statement/argument.

and can you please mind your language? the asterisks are no excuse for your lack of control in your language..

Get your mind out of the gutter man! **** can mean 'hell'.

so logically, if the 1-touch out-performs the tokina by such a wide margin, why arnt ppl grabbing the 1-touch instead of settling for a tokina? i dont see as many tokinas as the 1-touch in the open market really.

Probably because not many new ones are bought in the first place and you gotta wonder why.

And I didn't say that the Nikon out-performs by the wide margin the tokina, it was swimcraze that did. I just wrote that the Nikon held it value better. Scarcity doesn't necessarily mean that it will hold it's value. Just wait till CP dumps it's stock of Tokina 80-200s for low $$ and we'll see if they hold their value. Happens all the time just before the new model comes out.

 

[Clown]

Pls read what I wrote, I wrote that you made an excellent argument regarding the collar thing and that getting one with a collar was slim.

that's a moot statement already right? he's asking if he should get a tokina. who cares about 3rd party collars here.. lol..

and the 1-touch is likely to be an old lens, which may have alignment problems or a worn out mount or a broken aperture lever.

In your original statement, you made it sound as though it was hard to find a one touch that wasn't misaligned, worn or had a broken aperture lever. So that statement is crap.

1) i said it's most likely to be an old lens. (fact)
2) "which MAY have alignment problems or a worn out mount.. blah blah" dude i used the word MAY- meaning possibility. and the older and longer a lens is, the higher the possibility.

This was not part of your original statement/argument.

when or where did anyone or anywhere state that i cannot state facts?

over here now we're comparing the 2 lenses and i'm stating the facts. the 1-touch creeps like mad. the 2-touch lenses, tokina or nikon or whatever, creeps less. i supposed that's why all newer lenses are 2-touch.

Get your mind out of the gutter man! **** can mean hell.

same concept right? the need to add censors means an offensive word. now u're saying my mind is or was in the gutter. i strongly believe that these statements can be safely left out of this debate without much damage to the facts stated herein.

Probably because many new ones are bought in the first place and you gotta wonder why.

ok. here you did not state which lens is being bought. so i shall do a scenario analysis.

IF:
many new tokinas are bought - and not many are out in the market now, which means it's a good lens and there's no need to change whatsoever

many new 1-touch were bought (in the past) - for a lens said to have the sharpest 80-200 optics then, i wouldnt be surprised if many bought it. but you should ask - why the abundance of them now?

you said probably, meaning an assumption. do state your grounds for that assumption so we dont have to guess what's on your mind.

Because, ppl prefer buying a used 2 touch for $1200 or thereabouts! The fact is, the 1 touch 80-200 has held it's value for years now. Try getting rid of the Tokina in a year or two for $700.

And I didn't say that the Nikon out-performs by the wide margin the tokina, it was swimcraze that did. I just wrote that the Nikon held it value better. Scarcity doesn't necessarily mean that it will hold it's value.

aside from your grammar and typos,

here your statements suggests that the reason nikon lenses can hold their value is not because of quality but because of brand?

i never linked scarcity to the value of the lens, rather, scarcity is linked to the keeping rate of the lens.

Just wait till CP dumps it's stock of 80-200s for low $$ and we'll see if they hold their value. Happens all the time just before the new model comes out.

dude now u're really arguing out of point. anyway since i'm pretty much awake now i'll play along.
let's not get specific with shops here. let's say ANY shop dumps a load of any particular lens. of course, the immediate situation will be that the everyone grabs the lens at the stock clearing price. BUT it'll have to be a good lens for people to flock to buy it right? money is money and i wont waste money on a crappy lens even if it sells for 1000bux new and 500bux stock clearing.
anyway, yes, they dump stock and ppl come and buy. then what? the stock will run out (assuming that it's a good lens). then what? there'll be no more of that lens in the open market. then? then the value will rise again, albeit not to the original level but it'll not be very much lower too.

we'll stop here for this scenario. stock dumping for a new product's launch is not common anyway.

now linking back my derived assumption of your standing that the brand is the factor that holds the value of the lens, what if nikon decides to dump the 80-200 AFS cheap in favour of the new 70-200 AFS VR? i doubt any lens of that range will be able to hold its value, regardless of brand.
my guess: the 2nd hand camera shops will die. and then there'll be lawsuits shooting back to the dumper..
and so it all goes back economics.
so....
it wont happen. the price will stabilise itself.

but before you begin to write again, pls note that this dear gentleman here is trying to buy a 2nd hand lens at a stabilised 2nd hand price.

 

[Tetrode]

1) i said it's most likely to be an old lens. (fact)
2) "which MAY have alignment problems or a worn out mount.. blah blah" dude i used the word MAY- meaning possibility. and the older and longer a lens is, the higher the possibility.

OK dude, my bad, It was late and I didn't read your post carefully before replying.

when or where did anyone or anywhere state that i cannot state facts?

Did I challenge your ability to do so?? If I did I'm sorry.

over here now we're comparing the 2 lenses and i'm stating the facts. the 1-touch creeps like mad. the 2-touch lenses, tokina or nikon or whatever, creeps less. i supposed that's why all newer lenses are 2-touch.

OK so the one touch zoom creeps. what has that got to do with our argument? :dunno:

same concept right? the need to add censors means an offensive word. now u're saying my mind is or was in the gutter. i strongly believe that these statements can be safely left out of this debate without much damage to the facts stated herein.

You may read the statement anyway you like but I didn't think it was offensive. My apologies if I offended your sensitivities.

ok. here you did not state which lens is being bought. so i shall do a scenario analysis.

IF:
many new tokinas are bought - and not many are out in the market now, which means it's a good lens and there's no need to change whatsoever

Alternate scenerio/s:
1.Not many were bought because Nikkors were the preferred choice hence, the agent thought it wise not to keep too many in stock.
2.Those who bought them know that they can't shift them close to the price that they bought them for, so they rather keep them than loose more $$.

many new 1-touch were bought (in the past) - for a lens said to have the sharpest 80-200 optics then, i wouldnt be surprised if many bought it. but you should ask - why the abundance of them now?

Like I said before. I wasn't the one who said that the one touch Nikkor had better optics than the Tokina, it was Swimcraze.

I just wrote that the Nikkor would hold it's value better over the Tokina. And this isn't bec the Nikkor is optically better. It has to do with the fact that people prefer buying OEM lenses over 3rd party ones.

The abundance is probably due to people selling them off to get the new two touch lens. Also also due to the publishing houses selling off their equipment pool to move over to Canon.

Also an abundance would indicate that was a very popular lens and that many were sold new. People just wanted the newer and "better" two touch.

Ask CP the number of Tokina 80-200 they have sold vs the number of Nikkors.

aside from your grammar and typos,

Oh, please do point out to me what my mistakes were? I would really like to improve on my English and proof reading.

here your statements suggests that the reason nikon lenses can hold their value is not because of quality but because of brand?

Yes, that is my argument.

i never linked scarcity to the value of the lens, rather, scarcity is linked to the keeping rate of the lens.

I don't get you here, if the lens is of no value, then why would it not affect the 'keeping rate'?

I would think that people would be glad to get rid of the lens if they didn't think it was of any value. (unless they were forced to because they know they can't shift them easily and at a good price)

Scarcity may be due to the fact that not many were bought in the first place because the agent didn't perceive that there was a great demand for them (hence they didn't want to take the chance by stocking up on the item).

let's not get specific with shops here. let's say ANY shop dumps a load of any particular lens. of course, the immediate situation will be that the everyone grabs the lens at the stock clearing price. BUT it'll have to be a good lens for people to flock to buy it right? money is money and i wont waste money on a crappy lens even if it sells for 1000bux new and 500bux stock clearing..

Like I stated previously, I didn't say that the Tokina was a crappy lens!

anyway, yes, they dump stock and ppl come and buy. then what? the stock will run out (assuming that it's a good lens). then what? there'll be no more of that lens in the open market. then? then the value will rise again, albeit not to the original level but it'll not be very much lower too.

Not for Tokinas, unfortunately. Wish as you may that they would.

we'll stop here for this scenario. stock dumping for a new product's launch is not common anyway.

Tell that to CP. The agent for Tokina in Sg.

now linking back my derived assumption of your standing that the brand is the factor that holds the value of the lens, what if nikon decides to dump the 80-200 AFS cheap in favour of the new 70-200 AFS VR? i doubt any lens of that range will be able to hold its value, regardless of brand..

That would be probably happen. But I wasn't referring to Nikon dumping stock, I was referring to the agent for Tokina. In this case, CP is the agent for Tokina in Sg. And they do from time to time, dump their stock of Tokina lenses at very low prices. This affects (-vely) the resale value of Tokina equipment locally.

my guess: the 2nd hand camera shops will die. and then there'll be lawsuits shooting back to the dumper....

Won't happen dude and it hasn't yet. Stores like CP will and have dump/ed stock at or below cost if they feel that they need to.

and so it all goes back economics.
so....
it wont happen. the price will stabilise itself.

See above. It (i.e. dumping stock) is also about economics.

but before you begin to write again, pls note that this dear gentleman here is trying to buy a 2nd hand lens at a stabilised 2nd hand price.

That is just it, with the 3rd party brands like Tokina, it isn't stable, because no matter how good the Tokina 80-200 is optically, people will always prefer to buy OEM even if the 3rd party lens is better and CP dumping stock on a regular basis doesn't help either.

 

[sinus123]

Hi All,

Didn't know that the thread I started out seems to start out a small Clubsnap mini war of words and opinions... Let's make peace and keep each owns opinion and likings to its own... but the advices was pretty much valuable in what I'm looking for and will somehow help me in deciding which lens to get.

For the Nikon's 1-touch, I don't seems to like it although it's sharp as compared to 3rd party lens (personal liking), as much of you had discuss in the previous threads... and for the Sigma, can't seems to find second hand in the net or shops.... and for Nikon's 2-touch, second hand seems hard to come buy and quite expensive too, unless brand new got instalments payment....hehehe

Last but not least, many many thanks to all those valuable feedbacks and opinions..... Will consider hard about my new investment...

Rgds
Sunny

 

[concuss]

hi there sinus.

Anyway, it is a rather fine piece of glass, and I echo what clown has already said about this glass. In fact, he has seen my glass a few times already ;p

Just to add on, I would say that this lens is built like a freaking tank! It is heavy and once u hold it in your hands, you will feel the quality of the build. I have heard that the Sigma's build quality pales in comparison to the tokina. But then, u get to have HSM. I wish tokina will have HSM too. However, that said, the focus on a D100 is not too bad, except when the lighting condition is bad. In such cases, I usually go for manual focusing.

I guess every 3rd party lens will have its quirks. I tested the Sigma before on a Canon EOS 500, and man, the lens was slow! even with HSM! But then, we are talking about the EOS 500 here, i believe the performance will be different if we are testing it on a better camera body like the 10D or D60/D30.

Here are some images I have taken with this glass.

 

[lieu9310]

CP is clearing there stock for Tokina 80-200 AF Pro f2.8 at S$680 for Canon mount. FYI. Cheers

 

[dropzone]

Yup. But they do not have any offer for the Nikon mount, they quoted me 1k+ for the nikon mount.

 

[Ian]

Attention Tetrode and Clown

Notice is hereby given that any further friction, name calling or other BS will result in the immediate deletion of all your posts in this thread. Furthermore any further friction between you two anywhere else inside the Nikon Forum will be treated the same.

Ian
Moderator
Nikon Forum

 

[Clown]

chill Ian..

the matter has already settled long ago. no need be so violent..

 

[smallaperture]

CP is clearing there stock for Tokina 80-200 AF Pro f2.8 at S$680 for Canon mount. FYI. Cheers

Strange thing with CP pricing policy. Dirt cheap for Canon and Minolta mount and standard price for Nikon AF-D. Not fair man. If CP have got such offer for the Nikon mount, I would have grabbed it that very same day. Anyone know why offer for Canon and not for Nikon. In terms of population of the C and the N, it is more or less there. We understand why they are clearing stock for the M mount.

My opionion of the lens - optically, very, very small practical difference between the Nikkor and the Tokina. Other aspects like AF speed, size, weight, handling etc very similar. Durability - no problem. and of course, big difference in price and resale value.

 

[Tetrode]

Attention Tetrode and Clown

Notice is hereby given that any further friction, name calling or other BS will result in the immediate deletion of all your posts in this thread. Furthermore any further friction between you two anywhere else inside the Nikon Forum will be treated the same.

Ian
Moderator
Nikon Forum

Yes Sir! Warning noted.
Friction yes, other BS, probably, but I don't believe either of us resorted to name calling. :think: