pics from Tokina 11-16mm/2.8 on my 5D3

[Brian Brown]

My 5D3 showed up last week, and I've been running it through the paces alongside my 7D. I thought I'd try out the EF-S lenses in my stable, to see what will work on a full-frame camera, even if specifically not designed to do so, since it can save a guy (or gal) a LOT of $.

Although my Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 VC will NOT work at any focal length (due to extreme vignetting), my Tonkina works like a champ from 15 to 16mm. There's a varying degree of vignetting zooming-out from there, and becomes almost a full black circle by 11mm.

I framed up the same shot outside my front door and did a comparison of the 7D at 11mm and the 5D3 at 15mm, just to show the FOV. This was at 1/500 f4 in both shots, ISO100. I was aiming for the leftmost window frame in both pics, but was a little off. However, 15mm at FF is a considerably wider FOV than 11mm on the APS-C sensor of the 7D. For pixel peepers, I'm including the full-rez JPGs, too.

Seeing what a rectilinear super-wide that fills a full-frame goes for, I wanted to let everyone know that the Tokina is a very viable, affordable option. Even if you look at it as a 15mm prime.

[Josh Dahlberg]

Thanks for sharing Brian- very useful - the Tokina is a very well regarded lens that I've been considering for my crop sensor... never thought of using it FF.

Is it just me, or does that 7D shot look a lot crisper with the Tokina than the 5D3 shot? Vignetting is not a problem, but the 5D3 shot looks a little mushy in comparison.

[Chris Westerstrom]

I think it's hard to tell because they weren't taken at the exact same time, meaning a gust of wind could have opened up the tree a little more or something.

My first impression was that the 5d3 had more range, sharpness no noticeable difference. The difference in FOV was considerable though.

[Tom Hardwick]

Gotta say the the 11-16 Tokina is a wow on my 60D, and I love it. Wide, sharp, fast, compact. I just can't believe that Canon let this one slip from their lens range. Same too with the Tokina 50 -135mm f/2.8 - another (all the portraits in one) hit that Canon missed.

tom.

[Brian Brown]

Josh, I just noticed that my 7MB files were transcoded to 1.5MB ones, so I wouldn't read too much into the two files. Moreover, it was far from a controlled test, and I didn't even check for infinity focus, just tried (somewhat unsuccessfully) to match framing. Let me do more-controlled A-B tests and put full-rez links to files on my server.

I WILL tell you, that the corners of the frame will no-doubt be softer on a FF body than a crop, simply because this is the most difficult area in lens design to get good sharpness... that the crop sensors conveniently don't (can't) ever capture.

I really (really) wish I could get my hands on an EF 14mm/2.8L Mark II and A-B it to the Tokina. And see what 3-4x the $ gets us. For stills, it may (or may not) be significant. But I'd bet that for the 2k rez of video, that extra $ would be better spent on more lenses (or a trip to somewhere sunny and warm).

[Tom Hardwick]

No Brian - the EF-S lenses (and all those designed to cover the APS frame) give an image circle out of which the chip's rectangle cuts a slice. So a lens designed for FF faces exactly the same problems in the corner of the frame as does the lens designed for crop frame. Except that (and maybe this is what you mean) lenses like the 11 - 16 Tokina are designed for the 1.5x crop and Canon's 1.6x crop is more severe, so losing the extreme edges (and some wide-angle to boot).

tom.

[Brian Brown]

Tom, yes you're correct. I think it's a matter of how large an image circle that any given EF-S lens (or DX lens on Nikon glass with an EOS adapter) will resolve. The fact that the Tokina covers the FF sensor at all, tells me that its image circle is larger than some of the other EF-S lenses, and the center-cut portion a sensor captures on this particular lens will be less compromised on APS-C cams than the FF ones, due to corner softness and lens design.

If what I've digested of Ken Rockwell's wonderful contributions on the subject is correct... to put into a nutshell: 35mm FF glass is much more expensive to make than smaller formats (and still get good corner sharpness), BUT it doesn't matter as much, because larger sensors (or film sizes) make fewer and fewer demands (as size goes up) on the quality/resolving power of the lenses.

[Brian Brown]

This is curious... On further inspection of crops, there's a LOT worse CA with the 7D pic. Halos, purple fringes, etc. With the SAME lens. How can this be? I shot them both on "Standard", but I'm guessing that the 7D is sharpening-up its "Standard" more than the 5D3's "Standard". Or maybe CA is more of an issue with smaller pixels??? Strange. More tests.

Or maybe I should quit "peeping" and just go SHOOT, eh?

[Tom Hardwick]

Brian, you say ...'the Tokina covers the FF sensor at all' ... but any lens - regardless of the format it's expected to cover - will give some sort of image circle. The Tokina SD series gives a hugely vignetted image on my EOS100 (FF), but I can cut an APSc rectangle out of the image in Photoshop and all is well.

Generally lenses designed to cover the full frame are more expensive than their crop counterparts simply because all the individual elements are physically bigger, it has nothing to do with design complexity. Both formats require the same resolution from their lenses, it's just that the crop frame images will have to be enlarged more to fill the sheet of paper, so will show the failings earlier.

I'm pretty sure my 60D has CA and vignetting correction for specified and identified lenses built into the camera's firmware, and it may be that your 7D simply has this turned off in the menu. CA has nothing to do with 'smaller pixels', it's a compromise the lens designers come up with to give you fast, light and cheap lenses.

tom.

[Brian Brown]

Tom, I understand the whole image circle thing. As in my original post, I can mount-up my Tamron and it will show a massively vignetted circle, as I would expect with a lens designed for an APC-sized sensor. The Tokina MUST present a larger image circle, because it covers the FF beyond 15mm. Is there any other explanation for this (other than the larger image circle)?

I have an old Crown Graphic that I want to covert to mount my 7D or my 5D3 to give me some funky tilt-shift capability. You can bet that the old lens (127mm Ektar, IIRC) in that will give me some capability for that, because it was designed to cover a 4x5 negative. And I can get an old lens like that for next to nothing. So I would argue your point about lenses simply being more expensive because they're larger. That wouldn't explain the cost difference between a Zei$$ and a Sigma at the same focal length. More elements, more aperture blades, more coatings, more engineering, less CA, blah, blah. And zoom lenses will obviously have more engineering trade-offs vs. primes, and often suffer optically in comparison.

But then again, I don't really WANT to argue here, just to present some options in using an APS lens on a FF body, and see if others have tried other lenses with success.

Yes, I'm confounded by the CA with the same lens on both bodies, but I'll check into the firmware thing. That would make more sense to me than a smaller sensor rendering CA where a larger one does not, because I always thought it was an optical characteristic. So thanks for that.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Brian Brown

I really (really) wish I could get my hands on an EF 14mm/2.8L Mark II and A-B it to the Tokina. And see what 3-4x the $ gets us. For stills, it may (or may not) be significant. But I'd bet that for the 2k rez of video, that extra $ would be better spent on more lenses (or a trip to somewhere sunny and warm).

A less expensive alternative is the Rokinon/Samyang/Bower 14mm F/2.8 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/769532-REG/Rokinon_FE14M_C_14mm_Ultra_Wide_Angle_f_2_8.html It's manual only but at under $400 it's even cheaper than your Tokina 11-16mm.

[Nigel Barker]

Another thought. What you show is still photographs but vignetting will be different shooting video as the image is cropped to 16:9.

Finally a question. Does the Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 focus & zoom the right (Canon) way or the wrong (Nikon) way. I have been caught out before with a 3rd-party lens with a Canon mount & find it confusing & irritating when it focused & zoomed in the opposite direction to every other lens in my bag.

[Tom Hardwick]

Nigel - the Tokina's zoom goes the opposite way to my Canon 28 - 105 Canon, but both focus rings turn in the same direction.

[Brian Brown]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

A less expensive alternative is the Rokinon/Samyang/Bower 14mm F/2.8 Rokinon 14mm Ultra Wide-Angle f/2.8 IF ED UMC Lens FE14M-C B&H It's manual only but at under $400 it's even cheaper than your Tokina 11-16mm.

Yes, that lens would be viable for some. The fact that it won't take filters is a non-starter for me, since I need a strong ND to film outdoors and still maintain 180 degree shutter angle and reasonable apertures. Ken Rockwell reviewed it:
14mm f/2.8 Samyang, Pro Optic, Rokinon and Bower
He was much more fond of the Tokina... glowing almost:
Tokina 11-16mm

Per your other comment, Nigel, vignetting becomes more of a problem with a filter on the front and shooting video is indeed a different aspect ratio. I would say with a filter and no hood the 16mm max is about as wide as you can safely shoot without vignetting. I did some moire' testing yesterday, and didn't realize I was vignetting til I got home: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...5d3-vs-7d.html

[Greg Fiske]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

A less expensive alternative is the Rokinon/Samyang/Bower 14mm F/2.8 Rokinon 14mm Ultra Wide-Angle f/2.8 IF ED UMC Lens FE14M-C B&H It's manual only but at under $400 it's even cheaper than your Tokina 11-16mm.

And has mustache distortion which can not be corrected with any of the available lens correction profiles in photoshop. The tokina is a great lens and will be appreciating in July.