I like Tokina's AT-X lenses, especially the rugged build quality. I used the
80-200 2.8 AT-X for years on my Minolta X700's, but my experience with the
AF ones is that they are decidedly slower than the Canon lenses at focusing,
although I think this would be less of an issue with the shorter focal
lengths in question here. The two previous versions of the Tokina 2.8's
(both 28-70 models) also rate quite a bit worse (3.0-3.1 vs 3.9) on
PhotoDo's test results than the Canon big glass, and the Sigma is at or
below the Tokina in test results.
Tom P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "James McCauley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "EOS Mail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 11:33 AM
Subject: EOS re: Used gear in LONDON area
> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 03:30:34 -0800 (PST)
> From: Manuel Magrinho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Two Qs, please:
> 1) Does any one knows a place called Jonathan Harris,
> its ok?
Sorry, don't know it, so cannot comment.
> 2) I'm interested in buying a 28-70 2.8. Sigma's EX
> and Tokina ATX PRO II, seems a good value, any
> comments, please?
I know a lot of press snappers in London are using Tokinas' ATX Pro.
General opinion seems to be that it's solidly built, is as sharp as Canons
own 28-80 Y2.8, and only marginally slower to focus than Canons, all for
half the price of the marque version. The only downside seems to be that to
zoom the lens you rotate the barrel in the opposite direction to Canons'
lenses.
I can't speak from first hand experience, but it's on my shopping list
already.
James
----------------
James McCauley
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
portfolio: http://www.jamesmccauley.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
