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?

15 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

Specifically the 2.6-2.8. It's cheap, built well, parfocal, non-breathing, has a cinematic image (based on Angénieux design) that covers a good focal length range.

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?

3 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

If you are starting from scratch, pre-order the A6300. Buy some adapters (get a Lensturbo to achieve the Full Frame look you like), get a Tokina 28-70, buy some cheap Nikon Ais primes or Canon FD primes . Invest in a decent microphone/lavalier set and decent tripod. There is one caveat here though, a good photo set and a good movie setup are not one in the same. I have 2 D750's for my photo work and  2 NX1's for video.

Why the tokina exactly :p

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

2 hours ago, mercer said:

If you want the best lens with that look, spend the money and get the Nikon. Other 2.8 lenses will probably be fine for whatever you're doing, but I feel like you keep asking the same question and hoping you get a different answer. If you want to know what the Tokina or Sigma 2.8 lenses look like, Google them... Surely there are videos online using those lenses. 

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

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

Very different. 

Worse or better? :P

1 hour ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

I like the Nikon look, but I just can't get over the backwards focus rotation. It ruins so many takes. Maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal if I used a reversible follow focus, but I almost never use a FF at all.

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

8 minutes ago, andy lee said:

there are lenses from Nikon in my opinion they are the best as they have apperture rings and amazing glass

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. 

14 minutes ago, andy lee said:

the Sigma 24-70 will give you a great usable range , 24mm for your wides , 40mm for your mids and 70mm for your close ups ,you can shoot 90% of a movie with that set up ! or put my favourite Nikon 28-70 f2.8 on it

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).

2 hours ago, christrad said:

I don't know where u live but in Europe you can buy the NX1 (I did lol) for less than 800 euros !

NX1 price

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.