Tokina 28-70mm AT-X Pro f/2.8 Lens Review 

Well, for the price difference, in my case, this is a no brainer! The 4mm difference will barely be noticeable under many circumstances. I always end up using my Sigma 10-20mm for really wide shots! Unless you'll be shooting in very tight spaces, where a couple MM could make a difference, I'd say 90% of the time it won't justify the extra cost of the 24-70mm. This lens has enough coverage from wide to close-up, so for the price, it's a go-to lens for most of my work. When comes the time for the specific shots, I pull out the good old Takumar primes!

Hi Bem, the story between the f2.6-2.8 is that the lens was co-developed by Angenieux and Tokina. Angenieux used to market the lens as an f2.6 and Tokina as an f2.8. The later version had the f2.6/2.8 marking on it but the lens is truly an f2.8 and there is no f2.6 aperture. Cheers,

I can't really tell, since I never used the Sigma. But from my experience with other Sigma lenses (10-20mm f/4.0-5.6, 20mm f/1.8. etc) they are usually really good for the price. A bit soft wide open, some chromatic aberration, usually just purple fringe, but sharp lenses. I'd say, for the price difference, the Tokina would still win, imho. I'm using it for both photo and video, and the results are very good for my work. But one might prefer "perfect" image, then should consider a more expensive lens. I personally think this one has character in it's look, and I'm fine with that.

So its worth picking up?

@@donovanjugarap definitely!!!! I'm not reli a poor person who can only afford this lens and keep praising this lens. I own a dozen of zeiss and leica lenses and I know what a good lens! when it comes to zoom, this one is very good, it may not be as good as canon 24-70 2.8, but it's damn better than sony or sigma zooms!! Definitely recommend this

@@jesuscrisis5086 I'll have to try it out :)

@@jesuscrisis5086 As you say that you own a lot of lenses maybe you can give me some advice. I want to build myself a nice kit of 24, 35,50mm lens for filmmaking. In an ideal world the lenses should be sharp for corporate work but still have some character so they are also suited for more "cinematic" short films etc. Was looking at the Zeiss Classics becasue they are actually easy to find and around 500-700€ per lens

On the C100 Mk1, it's a great go-to lens for the price paid! A bit soft at f/2.8 but closing the aperture down to f/3.5 and it's more than decently sharp (considering the price!). It has a good range, from 28 to 70mm, so it can be really good to have on a camera when you can't prepare much of the shots. So for run and gun situations, it's a very nice and reliable lens. As for 24 vs 28mm... I don't think this would be much of a deal breaker!

@@TheVideoProGuys Nice 😀 Thanks for the reply!

This lens shines at F4, it has a nice vintage filmic look it is pleasing.

The autofocus is not bad, using it with my good old EOS 7D mk I. I've used that lens for a live event photoshoot earlier this year, and it's been working just great, no issue or hard times with the autofocus. As for noise, it ain't perfectly silent, but nothing you can't use in a church let's say! That being said, I'm using it mostly as my main lens on my C100 when shooting interviews, so I don't need autofocus for video. But using it for photo, for the price, it's a real deal in my opinion. Image quality is also quite sharp. Just a bit soft when opened at f/2.8, but nothing terrible neither. A very nice budget lens, compared to the Canon version! Hope it helps!

The Video Pro Guys Thanks so much for this response! I actually just bought one after seeing your vid and I’m waiting on it to arrive. I have an EOS R and I was concerned about AF performance. Hopefully my copy will live up to the hype 😅

It's actually quite good, I also use that lens for stills. It's not the most quiet one, but it's fast and accurate. The biggest advantage, to me, is the internal focusing. With the clutch system, you can have it all automatic preventing you to adjust the focusing ring by accident.

@@TheVideoProGuys ohh , impressive . Im planning to go at nikon FX format format but the lens that I've seen so far are quite expensive . This seems to be pretty fine . Do you think that for photography im going to be happy with it if i update to fx format ?

That lens isn't perfect on all aspect, it's a tiny bit soft wide open and there's a bit of purple fringe when wide open at f/2.8. But f/4.0 and this is indeed very good! I've done a complete Photoshoot with it almost a year ago and the photos are very clean and sharp. To me, it's a very good budget lens for both stills and video. Of course the Canon Cine Lenses or the Tokina Pro models are on a different levels, but this lens is serving me well and I don't have plans to upgrade it as I like it's aesthetics !

@@TheVideoProGuys thank you , very informative and very good answer. I think that im going to buy it and got to a full frame sensor.

:)

This lens came out before that technology.

At least, we try our best! If this helped you in any way, then we did our job!

Thanks JC, we really appreciate it!

Ronin Editor I was given this lense for free with my T3i. It’s the 2.6-2.8 is that a good thing? Lol

@@XtremeiNICK Whoa, that should be it then!

Ronin Editor wow, guess I lucked out. What do you think the value would be. Clearly I’m not super knowledgeable on this. I see the 2.8 ones on eBay for around 150. But I don’t see any 2.6-2.8 for sale.

@@XtremeiNICK Honestly, most go for around $450 and up, I've seen people buy them at $800, which is a lot.

Ronin Editor jeez, nice pickup I guess. Haha. I should try using it more, seeing as its still valued well. Thanks for the input!

It's not silent with the AF on, but when focusing manually, it's pretty good and smooth, imho. Used it for stills on my 7D recently, still works like a charm, especially for the price!

Don't think there's any glass in those West Hollyweir especiales. On another note, I'm still trying to decide if a "turd of the price" (0:36) is a good thing or bad think (as in "this price stinks") ;-)