Why do these wide angles look bulbous

It sounds horrible when you say it like that, but you're thinking inside the circle - you've got to think inside the box. :mrgreen:

Wren't you the one praising the D lenses in another thread?
Why not get the 20 or 24 mm f/2.8 D lens. You can get them used fairly inexpensively and both would be better than then the Tokina DX on a FX body.
Though admittedly not ultra wide.

Your willingness to accept poor performance by pretending it's creative would be better served by sticking with your DX body and buying a LensBaby.
 
It sounds horrible when you say it like that, but you're thinking inside the circle - you've got to think inside the box. :mrgreen:

Wren't you the one praising the D lenses in another thread?
Why not get the 20 or 24 mm f/2.8 D lens. You can get them used fairly inexpensively and both would be better than then the Tokina DX on a FX body.
Though admittedly not ultra wide.

Your willingness to accept poor performance by pretending it's creative would be better served by sticking with your DX body and buying a LensBaby.
I said that i loved how the exterior of the d lenses looked, i wouldn't want to use them tough. Though i thought i was clear about that. And i know that the tokina is not going to be sharp, i've resigned myself to that reality. The beauty about photography is that you get to decide what is creative to you and i get to do that for me. So please do me the same courtesy i'm doing you by not pretending to know what i'm thinking.
 
The Tokina 11-16 for me is a creative tool. On a full frame camera, i can do even more neat stuff with it in both video and photo.
On "a full frame" camera or on "your" full frame camera

I thought you had a d3100
 
The Tokina 11-16 for me is a creative tool. On a full frame camera, i can do even more neat stuff with it in both video and photo.
On "a full frame" camera or on "your" full frame camera

I thought you had a d3100

Not my d3200, i'm giving that away. I'm upgrading to full frame.
 
It sounds horrible when you say it like that, but you're thinking inside the circle - you've got to think inside the box. :mrgreen:

Wren't you the one praising the D lenses in another thread?
Why not get the 20 or 24 mm f/2.8 D lens. You can get them used fairly inexpensively and both would be better than then the Tokina DX on a FX body.
Though admittedly not ultra wide.

Your willingness to accept poor performance by pretending it's creative would be better served by sticking with your DX body and buying a LensBaby.

Because those lenses won't AutoFocus on his d3200 body.

Personally I'm saving up for the 85mm/1.4 AF-"D" lens. I think that lens gets some praise.

I've stuck at 18-35mm as it has a 77mm filter, and so do a couple other of my lenses.
The Tokina 17-35 uses an 82mm
and the 16-28 .. well, something else.
I've already invested into the 77mm screwin NDs, CPLs etc ... so until I make a jump to Lee/Cokin system I'm not going any wider, well except for a fisheye.

So you need to think about the other equipment that you have as I know you are heavily invested in a top of the line B+W CPL with all the bells and whistles which costs more than your camera body.
 
Last edited:
Because those lenses won't AutoFocus on his d3200 body.

Yes, except I was making the point that there are better lens alternatives to the Tokina 11-16 DX lens on an FX body.


Thanks anyway.


-_-
 

Most reactions

Back
Top