sandro

I see, now I'm even more confused. Where did the get the "same optics" info?

So let me get this straight: this 2.6-2.8 and this ATX pro 2.8 which are identical are two completely different systems? The ATX PRO is not as sharp, cinematic looking, parfocal and with virtually no focus breathing as the old 2.6-2.8? I read on here the latest ATX (non pro) http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/28-70mm-f28.htm has the same optics as the 2.6-2.8 so assumed even the ATX pro which is in between had the same since it's has also the same body. If I'm completely wrong then I might just get the Tamron 28-70 f2 for less that has all the issue like heavy focus breathing, plastic build quality etc...

I read that it has same optics as the pro version (it's identical from the outside, it "just" has 2.6). I saw this comparison and to me they're the same and not worth the extra price I was asking for the non pro because I could get it for less than the pro.

Does anybody know if the non "pro" version of the Tokina AF 28-70mm f2.8 (with M/A focus switch on the body and where the filter rotates while focusing) also also almost zero focus breathing?

I watched a comparison in sharpness with the the Tamron 28-75 and it is much worse. Nevermind it was the Sigma that is worse Do you have it? Do you find it sharp? I read at 50-70mm has a lot of "glow" and loss sharpness. Ony the 2.6-2.8 is parfocal and non-breathing?

Why the tokina exactly :p

nx1? pics are not like full frame of course...

I got that Nikon is better... I wanted to see a side by side comparison.

I'm trying to find the different look the other lenses give compared to Nikkor. I'm curious.

for low light 2.8 is important though

I already have that length covered, I was looking for something that can replace more or less primes in the 24-50 range with constant aperture.

Anyone has the 28-70/75 from Tokina, Sigma and Tamron? I doubt the Nikon is so much sharper, just to see the look how it compares.

the nikon zooms seems too expensive even used

Worse or better? :P

I have the Nikkor 35mm f2 and I love it. I wonder how different could the Sigma and Tamron be.

I'll consider them. Also the "old" tamron 28-75 f2.8 looks interesting and can be found for much less. The Nikon seems very soft at the edges.

I'm looking for a lens like this with a constant fast aperture. What are the good options with an aperture ring possibly? It'll used on the NX1 with manual focus so newer AF versions are not important.

These look they can replace all the primes I use... how much does it cost? Sigma is sharper or the same as Nikon?

I never watched this but if it has the same team as Breaking Bad it can look kinda bad. It's clearly shot on 16mm film and sometimes they even used the Canons for wide shots (it's my guess, I recognized the DSRL look).

wow... i paid €1300

I could help with my modest coding skills. I would like a less evident NR to get better low light results

Anyone tried the Samsung 18-55 kit lens for pucs? How does it perform for video also?

Try to buy the "part" for $650

they're great, still 16-50S?

I don't know what to say but at 1600 iso It's just too dark.