Tokina 24-200 experience

[Rufus]

I bought a Tokina 24-200 for my Canon 10D.

It was so soft and ill-defined in it's images that I sent it back as faulty.
A cheap Canon lens ( I bought a 28-90) is FAR superior.
Ignore the hype, the Tokina 24-200 is well made and good looking, but optically it's a pig! :eek:

[slfree]

Tokina is a very good lens maker. But with any maker, what you have to give up to stuff in a 28-200mm range is a lot. If sharpness is primary you might want to avoid all but the top of the line zooms

[Ungaloob]

I've officially given up on all 3rd party lenses, especially zooms. Not that there aren't some very good brands and good products out there, but if I have any choice at all I'll always go with the same lens manufacturer as the body, and even then I'll always lean towards single focal length primes... I've always heard a rule that you shouldn't go with more than a 2x zoom (like a 40-80 or a 200-400), or the quality will really start dropping off. When it comes down to it for me, I just don't like the feel of shooting with a zoom lens.

I've had good luck with Tamron and decent luck with Tokina, but if I can ever afford the real thing, that's what I'm going with.

[Rufus]

I'm with you!!

[kevinrstruck]

I am with you for the most part, but I do like the SIGMA lenses. I have had a couple and I am happy with their quality. Of course, give me some Canon glass anytime, but when the $$$ is not there, Sigma is a great alternative.

[Ungaloob]

I've never shot with Sigma lenses, and it's funny because even though I know people who swear by them, I've always had some kind of an unfounded bias against that brand. I started with a couple of Tamron's SP lenses ten years ago and I guess I just decided that since I was happy, that was the 3rd party brand I was going to stick with. I also always liked the idea of the Adaptall Mount, because I could shoot with multiple platforms and mounts with the same lenses. Nothing against Sigma, like I said I've never owned one.

[Rufus]

Actually, I still own 2 Sigma lenses and think they are ok. Not brilliant mind you, but sort of 7/10. They are the 17-35 EX DG, and the 135-400.

[Ungaloob]

I have three Tamron lenses, two of which I still shoot with regularly. I have the SP 17mm f/3.5, the SP 90mm f/2.5 macro, and the not-as-often used SP 500mm f/8 mirror lens. They're all the Adaptall mount, so I can use them on almost anything. The 500 has inherent drawbacks (mostly the slow, fixed aperture) and I think the 17 is lacking in quality a little bit, but I'm very happy with the 90 and in general they're very good lenses and I shoot with them all the time. Everything else I've got in the bag is a Pentax SMC lens now.