Tokina ATX 400mm f5.6

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
I just scored a Tokina ATX 400mm f5.6.
The AF version for Nikon.
I had often wanted one but never enough to buy one.

Well i should have bought one years ago. it appears to be a very well made lens and looks contrasty in the viewfinder. its much smaller than I expected and easy to handhold, not that I would want to.
The AF is internal and quick enough for me.

I will have to report back after I run some film through it.
 

jsouther

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
176
Location
Neverland
Format
Multi Format
I'd be interested in your report on this lens as I have often wondered about its performance. Looking forward to seeing your results.
 

randyB

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
535
Location
SE Mid-Tennessee, USA
Format
Multi Format
I had one of these for a short while back in the late 90's. It was an "ok" lens except that it vignetted quite a bit. Quite obvious when the field of view is even toned. The sharpness was quite good. I traded the lens for the 300mm f/4 Nikkor AF and I've been very happy with it, of course the Nikkor was a lot more expensive but worth it. RandyB
 

Rol_Lei Nut

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,108
Location
Hamburg
Format
Multi Format
I have an MF version of the lens (assuming the AF version doesn't use floating elements or something).

Mine is quite good. After the Novoflex T and Leica Telyt 400mm lenses (despite their field curvature), it's the best 400mm I've used.

Probably more modern and much more expensive lenses can do better, but for most non-professional or non-specialised users of a 400mm, it should be quite enough.
 

narsuitus

Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2004
Messages
1,813
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
darinwc said:
I will have to report back after I run some film through it.
Click to expand...

I too have a Tokina ATX 400mm f5.6. It is one of the few non-Nikon lenses that I own.

I have been very pleased with its image quality, its handling, its construction, and its 72mm filter size.

The only thing I do not like about this lens is the slow f/5.6 maximum aperture. However, I do not shoot enough telephoto to justify the purchase of the f/2.8 400mm Nikon lens.

However, as much as I try, I have not yet figured out how to run film through my lens.
 
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
Just a follow-up with a review now that I've used it.

Tokina AT-X 400mm F5.6
Construction: An aluminum barrel makes for a solid, stable lens. I cannot attest to the inside, but it is well finished and appears high-quality.
It has a built-in hood that slides out easily. The tripod mount is solid and can be adjusted out of the way.

Handling: About the size of older 300mm lenses, this is great to use. it can be handheld easily. But at that focal length, a tripod is reccomended, and required when not in bright sun. The internal focusing is quick and smooth, but mine would make a distracting click if it hit the end of the focussing range. The focus ring is recessed in the middle of the lens and can be used manualy easily.

Peformance. I am pleased with the image quality. The colors are vivid and contrasty. I did not have any problems with flare. The bokeh is pleasing especially for closeups where the background really explodes.

One problem appears to be bright highlights that have a purple fringing. This may have just been from water reflections, or it may have been the lens. more testing is required.

One thing i really like about this is the close focus combined with nice bokeh.

examples to follow:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
example 1:
F100. Kodak gold 200. handheld.
1 hr lab scan
 

Attachments

  • 005_5b.jpg
    160.5 KB · Views: 222
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
example 2:
F100. Kodak gold 200. handheld.
1 hr lab scan.
 

Attachments

  • 017_17b.jpg
    214.2 KB · Views: 228
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
Example 3:
F100. Kocak gold 200. Tripod.
1 hr lab scan

This is at about 10 feet
 

Attachments

  • 021_21b.jpg
    225.7 KB · Views: 197
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
Example 4:
F100 Kodak Ektar 100. Tripod.
Processed at a good lab and scanned on an epson v700
 

Attachments

  • temp_463b.jpg
    152.2 KB · Views: 197
OP
OP

darinwc

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,146
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
Example 5:
N80 Kodak gold 200 handheld.
1 hr lab scan
this example shows some nasty blue/purple around the highlights. I'm not sure if this is from the lens or the water.
 

Attachments

  • temp_302b.jpg
    265.3 KB · Views: 191

Alistair Wait

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
25
Location
Christchurch
Format
Medium Format
I have one of these with a nikon mount. It is a lens I cannot decide whether to keep or pass on. It has been adequate for the occasions I have used it but is not one I rave about - but when i go to sell it there is always something that has me say no - and I put it away for another day knowing it is great to have a lens like this tucked away for those certain occasions - wildlife etc.
I also have a 100mm in the same series and would not part with it. It is sharp - to the extent my wife would not thank me to use it as a portrait lens unless I diffused the image. I use it for macro work from time to time

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…