Anyone have any experience with the Tokina 24-70 2.8, and how

>>2745312
fuck you.

:'(

>>2745312

Both are objectives which you may use with great success.

Both are objectives which are outperformed by modern models.

BTFO

>>2745312
>having to decide between two bottom of the barrel lensmakers

Get a fucking job and go first party.

>>2745556
>Ignoring the increase in quality that Tamron and Tokina lenses have undergone

Brandfag pls

>>2745556

Some of the Tokinas I've gotten as gifts actually do pretty well compared to similar brand-name ones.

>>2745317
>objectives
sup fellow eurofag, learn your lingo better

>>2745312
get the tamron

>>2745312
1: gear thread

2: personal preference, but I think Tokina makes my favorite zooms of any of the 3rd party makers. None of their lenses have IS, but its cancelled out by the fact that almost all their lenses focus internally/are effectively parfocal

3: the tokina 24-70 is supposed to be excellent-- so is the tamron 24-70 though, for that matter, and it has VC/IS. But I'm gonna suggest an alternative:

For a fraction of the price, you can find the old Tokina AT-X Pro (Mk I or II-- should be a 77mm filter thread) 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 for Nikon (adaptable to anything, with a manual aperture ring). This lens was based on an old, excellent design by angenieux, is parfocal, and its one of my favorite lenses. I used to use only primes until I got this lens. You can find it for like, 300-400 on ebay-- use the leftovers to get the tokina 16-28 f/2.8, which is also excellent.

>>2745556
>falling for the 1st party Jew.

High end Tamrons are fine.
They also offer much better warranty than Nikon.

>>2746431
I thank you for your insightful reply kind sir

>>2745556
Sigma out preforms Nikon and Canon lenses quite regularly