In this post, we review the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, a crop-sensor lens with a fast constant aperture and a reputation for sharpness. Is it worth the extra cost? Hit the jump for our review and samples.
EDIT: Added comments re chromatic aberration, ghosting and flare.
Just a couple of months ago, I got an ultrawide lens, the Sigma 10-20 f/4.0-5.6 (reviewed here). I unexpectedly found it very useful for people photos, not just for shots of locations. The one thing about the Sigma 10-20 that I was not completely satisfied with was the aperture. It was a slow lens. For locations and inanimate subjects, it was perfectly fine. When there was plenty of light or when I was using flash, it was also excellent. However, for available light photos of people in indoor or dim light, the aperture was a little too slow. Subjects would appear blurred, not so much from the camera movement, but the movement of the subjects themselves.
Sigma 10-20: noticeable blur from subjects' movement due to the narrow aperture. f/4.5, 1/10, 1600 ISO. |
DESCRIPTION
The Tokina 11-16 is Tokina's second ultrawide lens for crop sensor cameras, and it looks virtually identical to its older sibling, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 (which is also a well regarded ultrawide).
The Tokina 11-16 is part of Tokina's AT-X PRO series, which is Tokina's line of professional grade crop-sensor lenses. It's made of plastic and it feels rather light but solidly-built. The Tokina features a Focus Clutch Mechanism which allows you to easily switch from autofocus to manual and back merely by pulling or pushing the focusing ring. When pulled back, the focus ring disengages the focus mechanism from the camera's focusing motor, allowing the user to set the focus manually. Pushing it in re-engages the focus mechanism.
PERFORMANCE ON APS-C
Tokina 11-16 on Fuji S5. f/8, 1/500, ISO 200 |
I first tried the Tokina outdoors. Not surprisingly the Tokina had stellar performance under these conditions.
Note: vignetting was added in post-processing |
However, the primary reason for my upgrade was to be able to use it for people photos in dim light, especially when I can't use a high ISO. Well, I got to use it under exactly those kinds of conditions. Specifically, I had used it with a Nikon D70, not exactly a low-light performer (it maxes out at 1600 ISO). Here's a shot:
Tokina 11-16 on Nikon D70. f/2.8, 1/80, ISO 1600. Ambient light only. |
But wait - there's more!
PERFORMANCE ON FULL FRAME
As I mentioned before, the Tokina 11-16 can be used on a full-frame camera. The widest focal length available on full frame depends on your tolerance for vignetting and the intended frame ratio.
At 14mm, there is heavy vignetting in the corners. However, if your frame ratio is 1:1 (square) or close to it, 14mm may be usable.
14mm on full frame |
15mm on full frame |
16mm on full frame |
Yes, it is possible to get sharp portraits under these conditions:
True, I had attempted shots at small world before, using the Sigma 10-20. But there are a couple of big differences. First, I was able to use a wider aperture of f/2.8 instead of f/4. Secondly, I was able to use the entire full frame sensor, instead of just an APS-C crop. Using a crop means that the noise will be magnified, effectively diminishing the high ISO potential.
With the Sigma 10-20, noise is much more visible because of the APS-C crop, and the slower shutter speed results in more noticeable blur |
The Tokina 11-16 is supposedly very vulnerable to ghosting and flare. Among the shots I've taken, I have yet to see one where there is flare that noticeably reduces the contrast across the frame. By contrast (excuse the pun), I have several examples of flare with the Sigma 10-20. As for ghosting, I also haven't seen much of it from the Tokina 11-16. Again, I recall seeing more examples of ghosting from the Sigma 10-20. For what it's worth, please check out the new post testing filters for protecting lenses. You'll see examples of ghosting from this lens as well as another lens, the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G. Considering that the 24-70 2.8G has a Nano Crystal Coating that is supposed to reduce ghosting and flare, and considering that the Tokina was tested at a much wider angle (16mm equivalent vs. 24mm), I believe the Tokina 11-16 had reasonably controlled ghosting.
The Tokina 11-16 does have a vulnerability to chromatic aberration and purple fringing. However, Lightroom 4.1 has a couple of tools to reduce chromatic aberration and purple/green fringing. Check out our post on Lightroom's Defringe tool. The lens I used there was the Tokina 10-17 Fisheye, but the 11-16 has similar amounts of purple fringing. You'll see how well Lightroom controls those fringing issues. Personally, I'm not really bothered by purple fringing and now that LR has those defringing tools, I'm even less concerned about them. Just my opinion.
CONCLUSION
Here are my thoughts on the Tokina in comparison with the Sigma and similar ultrawides:
- In terms of sharpness, in my opinion I think both the Sigma 10-20 and Tokina 11-16 are sharp. I would probably not upgrade to the Tokina 11-16 merely for sharpness per se.
- If you use an ultrawide to take a lot of people shots (or shots of moving subjects) in low light, the extra stop makes it more likely that the shutter speed will be high enough to keep the shots of the subjects sharp.
- The Tokina 11-16 can be used on a full frame camera, so if you have one, the Tokina is even more useful in low light.
- The Tokina is not as long as the Sigma 10-20, but I almost always use the Sigma at 10mm and the Tokina at 11mm anyway, so that's not a big deal.
- The one thing I would have wished for on the Tokina 11-16 is a built-in autofocus motor. I believe an ultrawide is much more usable when you have a camera with a swing out LCD to allow you to take shots from unusual angles. Unfortunately, the only Nikon cameras with swing out LCDs (D5000, D5100) or remote live view (D3200) don't have autofocus motors, so the Tokina 11-16 can't autofocus on those bodies. (Canon users have no such issues.) The new version of this lens is now available (see here) and costs just $40 more than the first version.
Here are some more samples from the Tokina 11-16 from a recent trip to Las Vegas.
EVEN MORE SAMPLE PHOTOS
Amazon customer gallery
I have heard that the Tokina 11-16 has worse lens flare than some other UWA. That makes it a great lens for indoor and low light situations, but harder to use for landscapes.
ReplyDeleteDo you have any comment on lens flare?
Thanks for bringing up that point. I have heard that too about the Tokina, but I personally haven't found it to be a significant issue.
DeleteI have in mind two kinds of flare: one where the contrast is reduced on the whole frame, and the other where there are blobs or arcs of light that show up. I'm more concerned about the former, and so far I haven't seen any of it. As for the latter, out of the 700+ shots I've taken I can remember one shot where there was a long green arc that showed up. Otherwise I don't remember seeing much of it. Then again, most of my shots with this lens have been in low light so that may have been a factor.
I'll take some test shots to try to pin down this issue.
BTW one issue that does affect the Tokina is chromatic aberration. It shows up more noticeably than with the Sigma 10-20, although LR4 has tools that can significantly mitigate them.
Best regards,
Mic
UPDATE: see the new section above on chromatic aberration, flare and ghosting
DeleteI, too, love this lens (on my Nikon D7000). Here is a recent sample: http://www.flickr.com/photos/60035031@N06/7269932666/in/photostream/lightbox/
ReplyDeleteI love the perspective! Thanks for sharing!
DeleteBest regards,
Mic
Will this lens autofocus on a D3100?
ReplyDeleteThank you!
The current version of the lens will not autofocus on a D3100 (although you will have focus confirmation). However, the new version of this lens, announced in January of this year, will have a built-in autofocus motor that will allow autofocus on the D3100. The new version was supposed to be out by now but it hasn't been released yet.
DeleteUpdate - the new lens with built-in autofocus motor is now available. At Amazon, it is around $740, just slightly more than the $700 cost of the old one.
DeleteMic, which one is sharpen based on your opinion, Tokina 11-16 or the 10-17 (fish eye) one?
ReplyDeleteBtw I always afraid that I will get the bad copy if I bought one (based on reviews).
Thanks,iqbal
Hi iqbal, in my shots, I find the Tokina 11-16 is sharper but there isn't a big difference in sharpness (the 10-17 is sharp too). As you know they are very different in terms of how they look, and although the 10-17 can be de-fished in Lightroom 4.1, there will still be a little bit of distortion left. I'm still working on the review of the 10-17 but I will be comparing the two side-by-side... pls. check back next week. Thanks!
DeleteBest regards,
Mic
Great, Mic. Bookmarked your blog!
DeleteIs there a way to subscribe to your blog, so whenever you post a new blog post/topic I will instantly get a notification via email with its excerpt?
regards, iqb
Thanks! Glad you asked. On the right side of the page (web version, not mobile version), there are some links. The second-to-the-last link is "Follow by email." I think that should work. If not, pls email me at info AT betterfamilyphotos.com and I can manually add you to an email list.
DeleteBest regards,
Mic
Update: the Tokina 11-16 II with built-in autofocus motor is now available. http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-11-16mm-AT-X116-Digital-Cameras/dp/B007ORX8ME/ref=dp_ob_title_ce/192-2505180-5969205
ReplyDeleteWould you recommend this lens on the fuji s5 pro? I'm looking at getting a wide angle and also a d700 later
ReplyDeleteHi! Short answer - yes! The Fuji S5's high ISO is not that great, so it can really benefit from a wide aperture lens like this if you use it in lower light conditions. At the same time, because of the Fuji's wide dynamic range, I like to use it with ultrawides such as this, and the Fuji is able to keep the highlight details even with lots of sky and other bright highlights. This is the lens I use with my S5 most of the time.
DeleteBest regards,
Mic
Thanks Mic,
ReplyDeleteI just needed the right advice from an actual s5 user, I was looking at the Nikon 12-24 or the tokina 12-24. I knew that with the constant 2.8 makes more sense. I'm using the tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc
Glad to help! Yeah I had the Sigma 10-20 before and it was pretty good, but the problem with it is that on the s5, I was forced to use higher ISOs. The s5's high ISO can't match current cameras, plus the s5 doesn't have high dynamic range above 1000 ISO - a double penalty. So I think the 2.8 is a real benefit for the s5 and that's why I got the Tokina 11-16. The good thing is that the Tokina is sharp even at 2.8, and because of the short focal length you can still have pretty good DOF, but the challenge is to pick the focal point carefully for maximum dof, which is something I'm still trying to master (it seems the dof calculators I've used aren't very accurate).
DeleteBest regards,
Mic
Thanks for a great review! I'm looking to purchase my first lens after the 50mm 1.8, and the kit lens that came with the Nikon D7000. I'm a photography newbie and was wondering if this was a good choice as a next lens? I primarily do portraits and in a very small studio...although I am all over the place with my camera for personal photography. Thoughts? Oh - and I'm going to Disney next month, your shots make me so excited to go!
ReplyDeleteHi there! Thanks for checking out our review! If you haven't done so yet, pls. check out our review of the Sigma 10-20 for more info on ultrawides.
DeleteRegarding your question, I don't have a straight answer. On one hand, if you do portraits primarily and you shoot in a small studio, then you are better served with a longer focal length. On the other hand, your 50 1.8 is a short telephoto on the D7000 therefore a wider angle lens like the Tokina would be a great complement to the 50 1.8 when you're not in your studio. So, I guess the answer to your question depends on your highest priority at this point. :) (BTW, pls. note that composing with an ultrawide takes a lot more thought IMO than composing with a lens with longer focal length.)
As for Disneyland, it's one of our favorite places for hanging out, and I think it's a fabulous for photography. I'm sure you'll have a great time!!!
Best regards,
Mic