How good was Tokina's Amatuer lens line?

[chip j]

SZ,SZ-X S2,, SL?? Thanks

 

[AgX]

And at what level is the RMC series to be placed? I guess at same level, though I read one report where an RMC lens is rated higher in image quality as its ATX counterpart.

 

[chip j]

Yes, the RMC is a high level lens, next to the ATX. I have a couple RMCs & an ATX, but I just bought a NOS SL 24mm and am hoping it'll be pretty good.

 

[Ian Grant]

Looking at it another way how bad was the company's Hoya range of lenses. I had a Hoya 28mm f2.8 Multi coated lens and it flared badly, it was very sharp and distortion free but the company hadn't coated every air glass surface. The whole range was dropped after a year or two and replaced by a new range of lenses under the Tokina brand name, the Hoya name hasn;t been used for lenses since.

Ian

 

[chip j]

I believe my 24mm 2.8 SL is single-coated. I haven't gotten it yet.

 

[BMbikerider]

If I was offered the choice between a Sigma Lens and a Tokina lens, the Sigma would be snapped up first. One exception would be the 12-24 zoom sold for use with C size sensors on SLR's is good. No, make that very good. almost as good as the Nikon Equivalent, both optically and build quality, for about half the price. It is a true gem. That I believe is classified as an ATX lens.

 

[narsuitus]

I once owned a Tokina AT-X 400mm f/5.6 auto focus because I needed the auto focus for my Nikon SLRs. At the time, Nikon did not make a 400mm auto focus.

I loved the Tokina's auto focus, lens material, style, workmanship, and ergonomics but regretfully, I could never get sharp images from the lens. After five years, I finally gave up and replaced the Tokina with a Nikon 400mm manual focus.

The Nikon manual focus was twice the price I paid for the Tokina auto focus but it was worth it because the resolution and contrast of the Nikon images were so much better.


Tokina 400mm by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Ian Grant]

If I was offered the choice between a Sigma Lens and a Tokina lens, the Sigma would be snapped up first. One exception would be the 12-24 zoom sold for use with C size sensors on SLR's is good. No, make that very good. almost as good as the Nikon Equivalent, both optically and build quality, for about half the price. It is a true gem. That I believe is classified as an ATX lens.

My experience with early Sigma lenses has taken years to recover from, the build quality was shockingly poor but we are talking about1975/6 Optically they were no better. While I only own one Sigma lens (from the 90's) that I was given and gave to a niece I have borrowed another occasionally and there's a huge difference these days.

Ian