03-01-2011, 09:12 PM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1298846479' post='6392']
Better, but still not good. Good enough for a lab test (where I can work around the issue somewhat), however I won't do any field tests with it.
[/quote]
Well, changed my mind ... I was too curious <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />
The decentering is low enough to try some field shots. Just don't expect wide open shots of frame-filling flat subjects at 28 mm.
One small surprise: Tokina does not really have a good reputation regarding flare handling (at least with their DX wide angle zooms). Especially with a lens that features a similarly large and bulbed front element as the Nikkor 14-24 I expected similar performance in this regard.
Surprisingly the 16-28 handles flare a lot better than the Nikkor.
It's a pity, really. If the lens was well centered, I would probably keep it.
-- Markus
Better, but still not good. Good enough for a lab test (where I can work around the issue somewhat), however I won't do any field tests with it.
[/quote]
Well, changed my mind ... I was too curious <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />
The decentering is low enough to try some field shots. Just don't expect wide open shots of frame-filling flat subjects at 28 mm.
One small surprise: Tokina does not really have a good reputation regarding flare handling (at least with their DX wide angle zooms). Especially with a lens that features a similarly large and bulbed front element as the Nikkor 14-24 I expected similar performance in this regard.
Surprisingly the 16-28 handles flare a lot better than the Nikkor.
It's a pity, really. If the lens was well centered, I would probably keep it.
-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
opticallimits.com