[mst]

Again, large portions copied over from Klaus' initial Canon review, but added a section regarding flare as well as sample images. The lens was a bit better centered than the Canon variant (and a LOT better than the inital Nikon sample we received), but still not flawless. That's why there are no sample images of flat subjects wide open at 28mm.



http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/594-tokina162828ff



-- Markus

[youpii]

Thanks. So many Nikon reviews recently <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[miro]

Thanks for the nice review.

As canon shooter I read your reviews too. Your field related tests like flare control for UWA lenses and use of teleconverters and AF accuracy for tele lenses makes picture complete. As experienced photographer your lens handling remarks are also interesting.



In such regard I should not call your review copy from canon section but it’s a nice addition to Canon reviews.



Greetings,

Miro

[mst]

[quote name='youpii' timestamp='1304482314' post='8041']

So many Nikon reviews recently <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



Well, so few for so long, so still so many more to catch up <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



@miro: thanks!



-- Markus

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='mst' timestamp='1304463547' post='8039']

Again, large portions copied over from Klaus' initial Canon review, but added a section regarding flare as well as sample images. The lens was a bit better centered than the Canon variant (and a LOT better than the inital Nikon sample we received), but still not flawless. That's why there are no sample images of flat subjects wide open at 28mm.



[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/594-tokina162828ff"]http://www.photozone...-tokina162828ff[/url]



-- Markus

[/quote]



Thanks a lot... a very good review with lots of sample shots...



Although for such a zoom UWA lens it is not the first priority, I find the background blur rendered by this fat boy very much pleasant.



It seems that ~20mm @ f/8 it sings (interestingly, just like the Tokina 11-16 @13mm, f/8).



But I believe I have to curb the enhusiasm concerning the decentring issues. I'd rather check it before buying, and it seems that I have to wait a bit more...



By the way, any comments on the lens cap (or better said lens "hat")?



Regards,



Serkan



Edit: The sample shot @ 28mm with "44" on a metal sign show the decentring issue I assume... Is that right?

[Guest]

In the verdict section - "an old Tokina decease" - replace "decease" by "disease".

[mst]

[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1304515684' post='8062']

In the verdict section - "an old Tokina decease" - replace "decease" by "disease".

[/quote]



Thanks, Sammy, corrected (also in the Canon review).



-- Markus

[mst]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1304513007' post='8061']

By the way, any comments on the lens cap (or better said lens "hat")?[/quote]



All three lenses came with this small "hat", but at least the Nikon variants came with a note that this is a temporary solution only (not sure about the Canon sample, Klaus?). A voucher for a free upgraded to the final product was included with the two samples I tested.



[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1304513007' post='8061']

Edit: The sample shot @ 28mm with "44" on a metal sign show the decentring issue I assume... Is that right?

[/quote]



No, the pole is simply running out of focus, the focal plane was not completely parallel. The tested sample showed some more softness on the left side than on the right wide open and some traces also at f/4. From f/5.6 onwards, it was actually ok. That is: in the lab, with test charts.



You can see traces of it in the 28mm/f2.8 shot of the pole next to the railway.



-- Markus