21 of 30 people found the following review helpful
A Mixed Bag,
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Tokina AF DX 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 Fisheye Zoom - Canon Mount (Camera)
- This lens is very well built. It feels solid.
- For the price, it goes to F3.5, which is as good or better than similarly priced lenses.
- I wanted a dramatic fisheye effect and this lens certainly delivers.
- When used with a camera like the EOS 20D, it does not support flashes like the 550EX. The flash simply becomes disabled.
If you usually buy L series lenses, you will find the limitations of this lens as a disappointment. However, if you usually stick to the more budget priced lenses, then you will likely enjoy this lens. It is a fine fisheye for the price.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Oct 11, 2007, 7:51:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jan 1, 2008, 6:22:05 PM PST
Luca D. says:
In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2008, 9:04:22 PM PST
Joshua M. Hoffman says:
Wow, you are a really pompous, insulting person. I guess I offended you by dissing your favorite lens and you felt the need to insult me on its behalf. I don't normally feed trolls, but I'm having a hard time resisting. Ok, here goes...
>When in the world have you seen a flash working with a fisheye?
I do it all the time in my studio, bouncing the flash off the rear wall or ceiling to flood my shot with even, soft light.
>Do you understand that a fisheye catches at least 180 degrees of field?
Actually, this lens captures no less that 100 degrees and no more that 180 (varies depending on zoom and sensor size) but you're close enough. Not everyone is fascinated with photographing landscapes and buildings. I use a fisheye specifically for the distortion/effects photography. Often shooting in small, controlled spaces. 180 degrees doesn't have to mean a huge amount of physical space.
>Do you have any idea what kind of monstrosity the flash would have to look like to support that kind of field?
In a small, space, I can easily fill the shot with light from a small flash head. See above.
>I doubt you buy L series lenses and if you do I'm sure you can't tell the difference between the quality of a 400mm L f/2.8 and a kit lens. Plus, photographers used to buy L series lenses are not going to buy this one for the simple fact that they would use an EOS 5D or better and get the full frame Fisheye from Canon.
I don't even know how to follow that logic. You say I obviously don't buy L glass because if I did I would own a 5D and wouldn't have bought this fisheye? Well, I happily shoot with a 20D (sure, I'd like a 5D) and this is the only non-L lens I've ever purchased. As far as the kit lens, I don't own one. You may not know this, but at the time I purchased my 20D, it as available as just the body.
>I bet you're one of those people who use the flash to photograph fireworks.
That's a cute insult. Nice try.
>Oh, by the way, on any fisheye you can't mount filters, either, you'd getting mile wide vignetting (now go to Wikipedia and look up "vignetting").
I guess what you meant to say is that fisheye lenses and front mounted filters aren't a good idea. However, you might enjoy knowing that many of the better fisheye lenses are built to support rear filters (no problem with vignetting). This lens does not support rear filters, sadly.
>This lens deserves 5 stars.
No, it doesn't. It isn't a 5-star lens, even at this price. It is a decent lens. It is solidly constructed, but for use on a Canon system, no way is this a 5 star lens. I'm sorry I bought it and I'm much happier with the Canon Fisheye I've since replaced it with. This might be a great lens for skibums who like to take pictures of snowy mountain landscapes and big tall buildings, but that's about it.
The fact is that this lens has strengths and weaknesses. Its nice for outdoor photography, particularly by day. However, its limitations are too great for a creative studio photographer such as myself.
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2008, 5:59:09 PM PST
Carlton Ward says:
Hello Joshua, I also have several L lenses and know their quality but I really like the colors the Tokina produces over the Canon 10-22 which is why I am considering it. I have the 580EX & 430EX flashes with an ST-E2 transmitter to cover the wider angle and though I will probably use this lens more for landscapes without a flash, I would not like the limitation of not being able to use the flashes if needed. Please let me know where I may find more information about the flash compatibility if possible. I have searched and your comment is the only one I have found relating to this. Thank you - Carlton - redjelly39 at yahoo dot com
Posted on Aug 27, 2008, 12:33:28 AM PDT
E. E. Tice says:
Hmm...despite the first person's unbridled aggression, it's given me an interesting idea - can this lens mount a filter? I actually like the vignetting look on Holga's, and would enjoy creating the same look with my 40D in a hopefully much more controlled way.
And in defense of kit lens - I think the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 lens it came with is amazing, and one of the best and least expensive lenses for travel...it's light, can capture most situations, and usually doesn't need a tripod. Just my .02.
Posted on Aug 27, 2008, 12:39:30 AM PDT
E. E. Tice says:
Aw...I looked on the Tokina website, and it does not take filters, which makes me sad. =(
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 19, 2011, 12:09:16 PM PDT
Chris R. Field says:
Have you ever heared of bounce flash? maybe a gary fong lightsphere?
way to go... sport..
Posted on Jun 6, 2011, 11:21:53 PM PDT
Marcio Jose Bastos Silva says:
Nonsense! Your flash must be broken or maybe your camera. I have this lens and used it several times with my Canon Flash 430EXII and never had any kind of problem. Take your camera and flash to the repair shop as soon as possible.
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 24, 2013, 10:35:56 AM PST
Brilliant. A photographer that knows what he's talking about. Thanks for the extensive explanation Joshua. :)
‹ Previous 1 Next ›