Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Tokina AT-X 60-120mm f/2.8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:44 pm    Post subject: Tokina AT-X 60-120mm f/2.8 Reply with quote

Does anyone own or have used this lens? I tried to search if someone has written anything about to this forum, but I found nothing.

I bought this lens couple of months ago for C/Y mount, and I have been pleased with it. Focal lenght is great for portraits and street photography, and the aperture 2.8 is a very nice thing to have for the whole zoom area. This lens is also very sharp at f/8.

Bokeh is the thing with this lens though. Some people will like it, others will not. At f/2.8 this lens produces very dream like, a bit soft images. You could say that objects "glow". I have found the bokeh of this lens to be beautiful, but I also understand that some would say it's bad because the picture isn't sharp. But to me, sharpness is not always everything.

A brochure of this lens Google found for me:
http://jfcampbell.us/photo/tokina.htm

I will post some sample photos for my next post. I would like to hear other user opinions of this lens too.


Last edited by Kimble on Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:11 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, so here are some sample test photos I took during the summer. Taken with Canon EOS 700D. I only adjusted some colours on photos #4 & #5, other than that the photos have not been edited. All photos have aperture 2.8, except the one where there is a man smoking his pipe - I think that one had aperture 8. I don't remember the focal lenghts for the photos.

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5

[/img]


PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it supposed to be that soft at 2.8?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blotafton wrote:
Is it supposed to be that soft at 2.8?

No !!! Neutral

The following eight images were all taken (handheld) with the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 wide-open at f/2.8, and were minimally processed (i.e., the 100% crops were only slightly compressed, while the large "thumbnails" were only downsized and then slightly compressed -- no edit adjustments or corrections, no sharpening, etc.):

Sunflower - 60mm - f/ 2.8 - downsized from original image -

Wreath - 60mm - f/ 2.8 - downsized from original image -

Wreath - 120mm - f/ 2.8 - downsized from original image -

Wreath - 60mm - f/ 2.8 - 100% crop from original image -

Wreath - 120mm - f/ 2.8 - 100% crop from original image -

Wreath - 60mm - f/ 2.8 - 100% crop from original image -

Wreath - 120mm - f/ 2.8 - 100% crop from original image -

The wreath images, at 60mm and 120mm focal lengths, were taken from two different distances, to keep image sizes approximately the same.

Obviously, all of these images would ordinarily benefit from some additional post-processing...


Last edited by fwcetus on Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:14 pm; edited 8 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The following eight sets of images were all taken (handheld) with the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 at f/8, and were minimally processed (i.e., the 100% crops were only slightly compressed, while the large "thumbnails" were only downsized and then slightly compressed -- no edit adjustments or corrections, no sharpening, etc.):

A Boatload of Boats - 60mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Several Boats - 60mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Seawall and House - 60mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

House - 60mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Sunflower - 60mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Sunflower - 60mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Boats and Bridge - 120mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Boats - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Bridge - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Clock and Flag - 120mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Clock - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Flag - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Egret and Gull - 120mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Egret - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Gull - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Starlings - 120mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Starlings - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Gull - 120mm - f/8 - downsized from original image -

Gull - 120mm - f/8 - 100% crop from original image -

Obviously, a 60-120mm lens is not much of a birding lens, but I do think that the 1:1 / 100% crops of the birds do show that the lens is capable of pretty good resolution.

Obviously, all of these images would ordinarily benefit from some additional post-processing...


Last edited by fwcetus on Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:48 pm; edited 8 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are a few relevant Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 links and images -

Optical diagram from the side of the OEM box -

Favorable user reviews on the Pentax Forums -
http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tokina-x-60-120mm-f2-8.html

A nice nighttime sample photo -
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/130-lens-sample-photo-archive/181061-tokina-60-120mm-f2-8-x.html

A favorable comparison between this lens and a couple of Rokkor prime lenses (yes, a bit of "apples and oranges") -
http://www.rokkorfiles.com/60-120mm.htm

A brief discussion of the lens (with some small images) -
http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?id=8003

The above discussion images on Flickr -
https://www.flickr.com/photos/joe_h/tags/60120mm/show/

A sample portrait from he Pentax Forums -
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/36-sold-items/22659d1227199909-sale-sold-tokina-x-60-120mm-f-2-8-pk-tokina60-120-1.jpg

The same (I think) brochure/leaflet that Kimble referenced -
http://www.allgeektome.com/pentax/x6012028/x6012028-flyer.jpg


Last edited by fwcetus on Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:33 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Kimble: Is it possible that your lense has one of the elements backwards?

Last edited by miran on Wed Aug 31, 2016 6:52 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 5:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A shot of the lens itself:-



PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very interesting sample photos fwcetus, thank you!

Makes me wonder if my lens is in someway faulty. Though I like the soft image my copy produces at 2.8. I use it to create that dreamy looking effect on my photos when I want one.

And miran: I don't know if my copy of this lens has been modified. I haven't done it because I don't know how. The lens produces very sharp images from f/4 onward. But now that I came to look my lens more closely, it has a small dent on the lens barrel - maybe the impact the lens has suffered has moved some glass inside?


PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2016 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, Kimble.

Mostly I wanted to show that, IMHO, the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 is reasonably sharp at f/2.8, and so I had included a few images that show that (for my copy, at least) the lens can indeed be sharp wide open -- this was primarily a response to blotafton's question. I then also added a number of images to show that the lens is even sharper at f/8, but of course that is not surprising, and in fact you said yours is sharp at f/4.

I've looked again at the reviews on the Pentax Forums ( http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tokina-x-60-120mm-f2-8.html ), and found comments such as the following:

"The lens is sharp right from the 2.8 in the middle, corners are softer. The reason is that the portrait was built for portraits mainly. It has really dreamy bokeh, super smooth butter type bokeh." -- "Prime quality images from wide open throughout the range! (on full frame!)" -- "Very sharp in the center from wide open with very good corners. One or two stops down corners get just as sharp! Very nice rendering, with a generous sprinkle of pixie dust. Great colors. Excellent bokeh. Good contrast" -- "sharp also at f2.8" -- The lens is sharp even wide open, but gentle with skin tones and surfaces, the lens designers did a good job here. Stopped down, sharpness becomes excellent. More important even: the Bokeh is creamy and allows isolating the object with a superbly soft background blur."

BTW, I did find a thread here on MFlenses about the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 at http://forum.mflenses.com/at-x-tokina-60-120-f2-8-t44079.html, which did include a few sample images, one at f/4 and the other four at f/2.8.


Last edited by fwcetus on Sun Oct 23, 2016 1:25 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2016 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fwcetus wrote:


Mostly I wanted to show that, IMHO, the Tokina AT-X 60-120/2.8 is reasonably sharp at f/2.8, and so I had included a few images that show that (for my copy, at least) the lens can indeed be sharp wide open -- this was primarily a response to blotafton's question. I then also added a number of images to show that the lens is even sharper at f/8, but of course that is not surprising, and in fact you said yours is sharp at f/4.


Those are some nice samples thanks for posting. Looks like a capable lens. The photos in the link great as well.

A question to Kimble: On the photos you edited, did you turn down the clarity setting? It looks similar to that.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your reviews and info on what seems to be a very interesting lens.

The Pentax Forums has a very extensive catalog of lenses -- not just Pentax either. So I went over there and had a look. Yep, they have a set of reviews on this Tokina, and it scores a 9 out of 10, which is very good. Go here to read reviews and for more pics taken with this lens:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/tokina-x-60-120mm-f2-8.html


PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blotafton wrote:

A question to Kimble: On the photos you edited, did you turn down the clarity setting? It looks similar to that.


No, I didn't do that. I only adjusted colours.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In that case there may be some issues with the lens unfortunately.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blotafton wrote:
In that case there may be some issues with the lens unfortunately.


Yes, well as I said before I'm very happy with my copy of this lens as it is now. It really creates nice portraits at f/2.8 - too bad I can't put any of them here, because the people I have taken photographs of don't want them to be published.

And on the other hand, I paid only 40 euros for this lens with lens hood, so I think I got a bargain.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kimble wrote:
I paid only 40 euros for this lens with lens hood, so I think I got a bargain.


You did get a bargain. Btw, did your copy come with a dedicated lens hood or just a generic one?


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't use zooms very often but when I do I try to avoid their focal length extremes as most zooms don't produce their best performance at these settings. Therefore the test shots below have been taken at a focal length of approximately 90mm. All have been converted from raw, no sharpening, cropping or pp applied and converted to jpeg. The camera was a Sony Alpha 6000, ISO100, tripod mounted.

f2.8


f4


f5.6


f8


f11


f16


f22


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DigiChromeEd wrote:
I don't use zooms very often but when I do I try to avoid their focal length extremes as most zooms don't produce their best performance at these settings. Therefore the test shots below have been taken at a focal length of approximately 90mm.

That's a ~very~ good set of shots (using a very good subject, too), Edgar. Not only does it show the sharpness throughout the aperture range, it also shows how the transition in the background bokeh occurs as well.

I do agree with you about zooms generally not performing their best at their FL extremes. However, that's partly ~why~ I tend to test zooms at their FL extremes, just to see how they actually do when pushed (or "pushed and pulled" for 1-touch zooms - LOL) to their extremes. Smile [For example, in my sample images for this 60-120/2.8 zoom above, all of them were taken at either 60mm or at 120mm.]

Furthermore, it usually seems to me (and this is in my own personal experience - YMMV, of course) that I tend to actually ~use~ zooms much or even most of the time at their extreme FL's, and less frequently at mid-range. E.g., I tend to use telephoto zooms the most at their longer end, and I tend to use wide-angle zooms somewhat more at their wide end.


Last edited by fwcetus on Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:52 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fair comment, Fred. I'll repeat the test for both extremes of focal length as soon as I can. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2016 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DigiChromeEd wrote:
Fair comment, Fred. I'll repeat the test for both extremes of focal length as soon as I can. Wink

Oh, I wasn't hinting for you to do so -- I was merely expressing my own foibles - Razz


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Following on from my previous test of this lens at approx 90mm, here are the results at the two extremes of the zooms focal length i.e. 60mm and 120mm. All the same parameters apply as per the previous test.

f2.8 60mm



f4 60mm



f5.6 60mm



f8 60mm



f11 60mm



f16 60mm



f22 60mm



f2.8 120mm



f4 120mm



f5.6 120mm



f8 120mm



f11 120mm



f16 120mm



f22 120mm



PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DigiChromeEd wrote:
Fair comment, Fred. I'll repeat the test for both extremes of focal length as soon as I can. Wink

DigiChromeEd wrote:
Following on from my previous test of this lens at approx 90mm, here are the results at the two extremes of the zooms focal length i.e. 60mm and 120mm. All the same parameters apply as per the previous test.

Very interesting sets of images, Edgar -- thank you for going to all that trouble to compile them.

In looking at the wide open f/2.8 images, it does seem as if the 90mm mid-range FL does perhaps do the best (just as you originally suspected), although the 60mm short end is almost a match -- but even the 120mm long end did reasonably well. In looking at the f/8 images, the differences are still there, but they are, not surprisingly, smaller. I would say that your sample of the 60-120/2.8 acquitted itself quite well. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those images look so nice, and the comments from the Pentax reviews are so compelling, it all makes me want to buy one. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depends on my point of view, I suppose), I can't afford any more lenses this month. I just bought a Tamron SP 28-135 for cheap and that pretty much took care of my lens buying budget for the month. But it looks like there's one more lens now that's on my "must buy" list.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fwcetus wrote:
DigiChromeEd wrote:
Fair comment, Fred. I'll repeat the test for both extremes of focal length as soon as I can. Wink

DigiChromeEd wrote:
Following on from my previous test of this lens at approx 90mm, here are the results at the two extremes of the zooms focal length i.e. 60mm and 120mm. All the same parameters apply as per the previous test.

Very interesting sets of images, Edgar -- thank you for going to all that trouble to compile them.

In looking at the wide open f/2.8 images, it does seem as if the 90mm mid-range FL does perhaps do the best (just as you originally suspected), although the 60mm short end is almost a match -- but even the 120mm long end did reasonably well. In looking at the f/8 images, the differences are still there, but they are, not surprisingly, smaller. I would say that your sample of the 60-120/2.8 acquitted itself quite well. Smile


Thank you Fred, I'm very happy with my copy. When I bought it a couple of years ago it was new and unused from a local camera shop closing down sale. Do you know whether there was a dedicated hood for this lens?

A final image after processing:-

90mm @f8



PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DigiChromeEd wrote:
Kimble wrote:
I paid only 40 euros for this lens with lens hood, so I think I got a bargain.


You did get a bargain. Btw, did your copy come with a dedicated lens hood or just a generic one?


It's just a generic one, but it fits very nicely to the look of this lens. I believe that this lens had a dedicated lens hood as many Tokina AT-X lenses have their own. They are made of plastic.