RMC Tokina 3.5/17 on Sony A7

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

There's been a lot of talk about (ultra) wide-angle lenses and their performance on the Sony A7, especially with rangefinder lenses. I feared a bit that this would spoil my fun with the A7 and that i'd need a modification even when only using normal SLR lenses.
The Tokina 17mm is a normal SLR lens and i think it performs well on the A7!

I took it with me on the sunday walk and made some shots, no.5 is a crop of the far left edge out of pic no. 4.

1.

Tokina 17mm on A7 no.1 by René Maly, on Flickr

2.

Tokina 17mm on A7 no.2 by René Maly, on Flickr

3.

Tokina 17mm on A7 no.3 by René Maly, on Flickr

4.

Tokina 17mm on A7 no.4 by René Maly, on Flickr

5.

Left edge of no.4 by René Maly, on Flickr

Himself · Expire: 2013-05-30

Looks good!
I have the lens and I'm pleased with its performance. There is a bit of distortion that I can live with.
Also I have to take care of vignette. It's your case too.

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

One interesting thing, Rene:

That same shot which you show the edge, I looked at the full and the opposite edge:

Tokina 17mm on A7 no.4 by René Maly, on Flickr

The lens seems decentered if you compare the sharp left edge to the right.

The windmills really get soft as you move right, and the same effect is confirmed in the railing on the lower right.

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

Distortion and vignetting: no problem, for me that's part of the character of this lens.

The other issue is quite interesting though!! I did not realise this, i chose the left edge because there's more to see than on the right edge.
Here are 3 more shots, first uncropped, second (left) and third (right) are the exact opposite edges. Well, i guess these old pieces of glass aren't all perfect then! But hey, i can live with it!

1.

2.

3.

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7554 Location: Hong Kong

Your look much better than mine. I can live with slight imperfection but it is not the case on my copy. Tuzki with lens

invisible · Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 343

Interesting results. Can you post a couple photos of the lens?

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

kds315* · Expire: 2021-03-09

Those pics make me happy that I bought a few back in the days... Wink

invisible · Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 343

kds315* · Expire: 2021-03-09

invisible · Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 343

kds315* · Expire: 2021-03-09

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

Gerald · Joined: 25 Mar 2014 Posts: 1196 Location: Brazil

I own a Tamron SP 17mm F3.5 but have no experience with the Tokina 17mm F3.5. What I know is that when these lenses were new, the Tamron cost more than double the Tokina:

Tamron SP 17mm F3.5 ......... £224
Tokina 17mm F3.5 ............... £108

Certainly the Tokina was/is a good lens, but the prices when new reflected the perception of the photographers of the time about the relative quality of the two lenses. The Tamron was aimed at the professional market, and it was a cheaper alternative to the Nikkor 18mm F4 (£420) and Canon 17mm F4 (£282). The Tokina, on the other hand, was intended for the amateur enthusiasts market. Nonetheless, it is good to remember that ultra wide-angle lenses were never cheap. At the time, one could buy a Summicron M 35mm F2 for £205.

Below a close-up shot with my Tamron 17mm F3.5 on a Sony A99, ISO 6400, focus distance 25cm.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

I had both , Tamron sold , Tokina kept for longer term , none of them top lens , but none of them price in sky , so what you pay what you get is fair.
Tamron is more versatile due interchangeable mount perhaps that is all major difference I rate them more less to equal.

Tokina is a great inexpensive super wide option , best one what I know on low cost , bellow 500 USD.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

The tokina is very good, I have three copies, one being a later AF AT-X version, none decentred as far as I can tell.

However, it's clear that ultra wide angles are where the most improvement has been made in recent times. The mid 90s Tokina 3.5-4.5/20-35 zoom illustrates that, it's better than 90% of older ultra wide primes.

One area the Tokina 17 really shines is BW film, especially architectural work in that medium. I'll have to dig out some of my old BW film work with one of my Tokina 17s.

Gerald · Joined: 25 Mar 2014 Posts: 1196 Location: Brazil

Interestingly, in pentaxforum.com the Tokina SL 17mm F3.5 has rating of 9.0 and average price of $95, whereas the Tamron SP 17mm F3.5 has rating of 7.25 and average price of $205.

invisible · Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 343

pinholecam · Joined: 26 Nov 2012 Posts: 223

Nice results.

I have a Soligor 17/4 which I think is the same lens.

Works well enough imo too.
Esp given the price.

Antoine · Joined: 08 Jan 2016 Posts: 298 Location: London

Just received my Vivitar 17mm f 3.5 made by Tokina and wanted to try it in difficult conditions: facing the sun and infocus subject in corner (had to reduce definition to upload to 1600*1280, but did not modify anything):

Antoine · Joined: 08 Jan 2016 Posts: 298 Location: London

I have to add: picture taken by Sony A 6000 (APS-C) f 8.

The flowers are pretty sharp and the lens does flare and CA.
But pretty good overall

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

There's a Tamron SP 17mm (adaptall lens) on it's way to me, could not resist at that price. Can't wait to shoot with it, i wonder how much better it will be compared to the Tokina.

Antoine · Joined: 08 Jan 2016 Posts: 298 Location: London

According to this link
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2010-08-10-17mm-sharpness/
The Tokina 17mm is not such a bad lens when compared to Nikons primes and zooms...actually sharper in the corners than the 4 Nikons (and AF Tokina) tested...
Obviously I don't know about Tamron and wish you the best.

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24