Excellent build quality,
F2.8

Poor optical quality.

Right from the picture you get in the viewfinder you can see that the image is rather soft in compare with Sigma Ex, Nikkor, or Canon. The test films I shoot indicate another problem, the corner and center are not focusing at the same time. If you are locked on a subject that apears sharp at the center, you'll have to move the focus to 3 m distance in order to get the same subject shrp at the egde. The picture quality in 2.8 is below accept. I wouldn't carry all this weight only to shoot from f/4 and down. The mechanical build quality is outstanding!!

Customer Service

The importer of Tokina in Finland is a unique story. They are doing their best to avoid selling. It took me some months until I got to see the lens, and test it. This has nothing to do with service.

Similar Products Used:

Tokina AT-X 35-70 2.8
Sigma 28-70 2.8
Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX
Nikon 28-70 3.5-4.5

build quality, optics,
autofocus.

weight (quality gives weight!), some distorsion at 80 mm.

I am in love with this lens. Too many lenses today do feel like Lego products.

Customer Service

Service in Sweden not too god!

Similar Products Used:

Tamron 28-200
Canon 28-80
Sigma 28-70

- optics
- building quality

- weight
- flare (OK of you put on the hood always)
- quality control

I use it on a Nikon F100. The orginal one has serious focusing problem. Poor picture quality (out-of-focus) even the camera show focused correctly. Even the viewfinder proves that focus is OK.

Sent for repairs 2 times but cannot be fixed. On the 3rd time, they replaced it with another one. Then, the lens works great. I can endorse that the lens is sharp as razor. Even with f2.8 at 80mm shooting almost at 0.5m, the quality is better than my Nikkor 28-85 at similar situation.

Advise to Nikon user: if you experience that the lens is not sharp, demand your locate dealer to fix it until it is sharp as a razor.

Customer Service

Not bad

Similar Products Used:

Nikkor 28-85 f/3.5-4.5
Nikkor 28-105 f/3.5-4.5
Nikkor 24-120
Tamron 28-200

Build quality. Transition from AF-MF and back is nice and quick. Not a 2 step process like AT-X Pro 270 II

Optical quality

First impression was WOW...nice build quality but after a few test rolls, optical quality doesn't seem so hot. Distortion on low end is more than average. Light falloff is nicely controlled. Flare seems a little worse than AT-X Pro 270 II. Center to corner sharpness is terrible. Don't even think about it wide open. Contrast is nice. Both Tokinas I've had are warmer than Nikkors. I noticed viewfinder to be blurrier than actual pictures...??? It's a great consumer lens but not a pro lens so why carry all that weight. Anyway I returned mine.

Customer Service

No Experience

Similar Products Used:

Tokina AT-X Pro 270 II
Nikkor 28-105 f/3.5-4.5

This review applies only to the Canon Incarnation. I have many Canon L lenses (except the 28-70 L) and can say that this lens is as good as them. I would put the Canon 70-200 L 2.8 ahead by a notch optically. Even the focusing motor is quite smooth but not a Canon USM (of course). I had a Tamron 28-105 2.6 lens which was never gave me one decent chrome.

None

Go for it if you are a Canon user. I cannot comment on the Nikon version - many negative comments on that delayed my buying this lens. I would save the $500 over the Canon 28-70 L and enjoy the extra 10mm.

Customer Service

No experience with repair but their rebate people were very helpful when I reported that the warranty card was missing.

Similar Products Used:

See above

Fast, 2.8
Solid Build
Great Price
Extra 10mm on the long end over competitors
Great optics

Fuzzy wide open and at extremes in focal range (stop down in those instances)
Not as fast as Canon USM
Big and heavy (hey, it's a pro lens)

Listen, if you are an over the top purist you're not going to settle for anything that doesn't have (insert your body manufacturer name here)'s name on it and isn't an (insert you body manufacturer's pro lens designation here) lens.

For the rest of you who don't want to lay down that kind of money you won't find a better lens in this category.

This is my primary wedding lens and doesn't leave my EOS 3 until I'm doing portaits. For that I have my EF85 f/1.8 USM. Even then I'll swap out when a big group wants a portrait and have seen little difference in quality.

If you're worried about Canon compatibility I've had no problems with my EOS 3. I use eye control focus with all focusing points enabled and have never had a problem picking my focus point with it.

If your destination is the zoo or the park with your kids this lens delivers the goods big time. I have the framed 8x10s and the 11x14s to prove it. When I had to I've also used it for sporting purposes (disc golf and other outdoor sports) and it functioned flawlessly in AE servo mode even on the EOS 3's high speed advance with the PB-E2.

If used correctly (i.e. not always wide open and not always at the extremes of its range) this lens will deliver great results. If you're at the long end AND wide open you will get fair results (photo snobs would say "unacceptable"). Stay away from having both focal length and aperture extremes if you want the best results (but then you can say that with just about any zoom lens).

Some say it's fuzzy in the viewfinder and in the results -- I have yet to see it. If you want the EF 28-70 f/2.8L you can go get it. I'll save my money and get the extra 10mm any day.

Customer Service

Rebate check took a long time but it did come.

Similar Products Used:

Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 II
Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 (original)

Great Construction
Great Feel
Good Finish
Smooth Focusing

FLARE...Lots of it...It's not the acceptable kind of flare that you can pass off as art, either. There were nasty rainbow halos around any small light source at all focal lengths and all aperatures. Had to return lens.

Hey, a "Pro" lens in this price range ought to be sharp!!! Otherwise we'd all save ourselves a lot of money and buy all Pheonix and Vivitar lenses and forget Zeiss, Nikon, Canon, and other top of the line, right?

Similar Products Used:

Sigma 28-70 EX, 24-70 EX, Canon 28-70 "L"

built like tank
good looking

have problem to focus

Because almost every dealer had no stock on this lense, so I was very happy finally I had it from Adorama. I shoot a few rolls of film under different focal legth, none of them had accurate focus. Not only Nikon F100 had this problem, also it did not work properly with my Minolta XTSI. Finally I returned it and got a more reliable Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8 lense.

Customer Service

return

Similar Products Used:

Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 proII
Minolta 24-105 f/3.5-4.5

High quality construction and glass, Quick Auto focus

77mm size, aperture lock unlocks frequently by accident, possible slight design flaw

The glass and design in this lens is incredible for a zoom. It is very clear and contrasty, most of the time. I like the heaviness and quality contruction. I honestly evaluated my lens by taking photos of the same objects at every standard f/stop and at the main mm settings (28,35,50 and 80). I did this from 6 ft. away and then again from 2 ft. away. I used a Nikon F100 and Konica Impresa 50 film(for the most clarity). Here is what I found for my lens on my camera. It is not that the lens produces a blurry image at 2.8 as some have said. It simply has a very small D.O.F. at that aperture (like less than 2-inches). An 80mm shot at f/2.8 gave me what at first appeared to be a blurry image (it was a close up portrait) but then I noticed that the childs hair just in front of the eyes (which is where I focused) was completely clear! And objects in that same plain were also completely clear. So the camera/lens combination focused about 1/2 to 1 inch closer to me than it was supposed to. I know now to focus lock and then move the camera about 1/2 inch forward in this type of situation. Is this a problem with the lens or the lens on this camera? I would think it is the lens. I don't know. A test at 28mm and f.2.8 showed the same problem. This same problem also occured at f/4 but to a lesser apparent degree (D.O.F. was greater of course). At 5.6 the problem was gone. The optics are some of the best I have seen in a zoom but I think the lens was not quite designed correctly for the wide open settings. I still use it daily keeping in mind its weaknesses. If Tokina corrects the problem they will have the best zoom on the market in the "28,35-70,80" range. Some reviewers also mentioned that the lens imparts some colorization to the photo. I have noticed no such problem.

Customer Service

None needed yet

Similar Products Used:

None similar

"PRO" Construction,
Good AF

"Poor"Optics

Hi! I am new to in this hobby and this was my first lens with my EOS-7 camera.
I have been using this lens for two months before
I sold mine.
I am very disappointed with mine and sold it and bought EF28/2.8 EF50/1.4 instead. I wasted my money on this lens and will never look back other than Canon.
Results:
1. Focusing problem with my eos-7 camera
- AF did not work on 32~28mm range(But It does not bother me the way of my shooting)

2.Quality control is not good
- I opend several new boxes to choose right stuff
New lenses are not all the same.
3. Some distortion
- 28mm,barrel distortion-it's OK
35mm, Zero
80mm, pincushion distortion-not good

4.Flare
-You can also see it through viewfinder.

5.Bad color
- Don't expect you get real white color!
Saturation is under expectation.

6.Vignetting on shorer range wide open

7.Light falloff at corner
- Light falloff plus bad color!~ not happy
With this result!!

8.contrast seems to Ok
9.Poor resoluton
- When stopped down to f/8.0, It is still below
other "L" lens's wide open
10.Poor performance when wide opened(f2.8~f4.0)
- It is useless! and is not real F2.8 lens.

11. It is likely Softfocus lens 80mm wide open
at short distance (50cm~2m)
- This result forced me to sell mine. Unhappy!

Customer Service

I sold mine before need it!

Similar Products Used:

Nothing like in this focal length;but EF 28/2.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4L, 300/4L