[Klaus]

Pretty impressive it seems ...

[url="http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20100830_389903.html"]http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20100830_389903.html[/url]

[youpii]

From the MTF curves, we can expect soft corners at 16mm, but still sharp on 2/3 of the frame.

[sloma_p]

Not a bad bokeh for a WA zoom <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> And CAs seem to be a bit better controlled than in my 12-24/4.

[Bare]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1283094469' post='2308']

Pretty impressive it seems ...

[url="http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20100830_389903.html"]http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/lens_review/20100830_389903.html[/url]

[/quote]

Yes, pretty impressive and great news is price in Japan, ebout 2x times than Nikkor 14-24 F2,8 or Canon 16-35 F2,8 II.





[quote name='sloma_p' timestamp='1283204938' post='2352']

Not a bad bokeh for a WA zoom <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> And CAs seem to be a bit better controlled than in my 12-24/4.

[/quote]

100% it has less CA than any other Tokina lens, it's because same glass which can be found in new Sigmas, FLD glass.

[Guest]

As a concert-shooter I am very interested in this lens. Especially its performance wide-open.

The 14-24 is out of budget unfortunately and the 17-35 doesn't perform well enough at 2.8 (and I am not that picky! I still use a beater 35/2)