Topic: Got my hands on a 400mm!

[Frank in JC]

I borrowed my dad's Tokina 400mm f/5.6 AT-X Pro and here are two pics taken while hanging out of my apartment window, from Sunday and yesterday at sunset.  The building under construction is in Jersey City (yet another high rise condo) and three tall ones behind it are in downtown Manhattan: The Trump Building, Bank of America, and Deutsche Bank.  According to Google Earth, my apartment is 2.2 miles away. 

This lens, discontinued years ago, only runs about $200 used by the way.  It's not world-class glass, but it works... and on a cropped-sensor DSLR, it has amazing reach.

[phanophish]

Looks like it is a bit crooked....   

So the question is what does it look like for bokeh on closer subjects?  Got any examples?  What aperture were the shots you posed here shot at?  Does it still look good wide open?  For $200 I might have to pick one up.

[stirinthesauce]

  For $200 I might have to pick one up.

ditto.

Show us some other shots 

[Frank in JC]

Looks like it is a bit crooked....   

So the question is what does it look like for bokeh on closer subjects?  Got any examples?  What aperture were the shots you posed here shot at?  Does it still look good wide open?  For $200 I might have to pick one up.

It was so hard to hold perfectly level, I didn't even bother trying.  I was in such an awkward position, the image was shaking like crazy!  It's possible to hand-hold it, but it's more of a tripod lens.

The pics are a little misleading with regard to sharpness.  The B&W, which looks sharper, was shot at f/5.6 and the color at f/8, but the B&W was at ISO 200 and the color, 800 (denoised).  It's noticeably sharper at f/8 than f/5.6. 

It does a good job blurring the background, but I'm not sure how nice the results are yet.  I'll post some examples this week.  Overall, sharpness, contrast and saturation isn't what I get from nicer lenses, but you know what a nice 400mm prime costs!

[Frank in JC]

Bunch of user reviews here:

http://www.photographyreview.com/mfr/tokina/35mm-primes/PRD_84302_3111crx.aspx

[phanophish]

Looks like it is a bit crooked....   

So the question is what does it look like for bokeh on closer subjects?  Got any examples?  What aperture were the shots you posed here shot at?  Does it still look good wide open?  For $200 I might have to pick one up.

It was so hard to hold perfectly level, I didn't even bother trying.  I was in such an awkward position, the image was shaking like crazy!  It's possible to hand-hold it, but it's more of a tripod lens.

The pics are a little misleading with regard to sharpness.  The B&W, which looks sharper, was shot at f/5.6 and the color at f/8, but the B&W was at ISO 200 and the color, 800 (denoised).  It's noticeably sharper at f/8 than f/5.6. 

It does a good job blurring the background, but I'm not sure how nice the results are yet.  I'll post some examples this week.  Overall, sharpness, contrast and saturation isn't what I get from nicer lenses, but you know what a nice 400mm prime costs!

I'm not expecting it to make me want to trash my 70-200/2.8.  But like you said it looks promising for such an affordable lens.  I'm thinking it would be nice for outdoor sports, motor sports and wildlife. 

[Frank in JC]

Had to share!

This is about a 40% 20% crop.  Hand-held, but with a lot of sharpening.

[Frank in JC]

Couple more from last night...

1 second at f/11, obviously not on a tripod!  FWIW, these are also at ISO 1600 w/o any de-noising or sharpening.

[Frank in JC]

This egret was fishing in the same place I took the long exposure of Manhattan with the marina in the foreground.














These two pics show the bokeh a little better, but I'll post more soon.

I was sitting in a park with my friend Lia.  She's a print journalist but still with an interest in photography, so I knew she would get a kick out of the 400mm.  No sooner did I hand her the camera that she started pointing it at people in the park.  This is her first pic, believe it or not.  I bumped up the ISO so she would get a fast shutter speed at f/5.6 (1/6000 sec 1/1600 I mean, oops), than used Noiseware to clean it up.



And this was mine, trying to save face... but hers is still better.  In the original, *every single word* on the front page is clearly legible!

[phanophish]

Nice stuff.  That seals it, gotta get one.  I love the bokeh on the people shots in the park.  How fast is the focus with this lens on your camera (D300 correct?)

[Frank in JC]

Nice stuff.  That seals it, gotta get one.  I love the bokeh on the people shots in the park.  How fast is the focus with this lens on your camera (D300 correct?)

The D300's AF system definitely helps this lens out.  It was hard to get focus lock on flying birds, but that's mainly due to my lack of experience.  Frustratingly, the camera would drive the lens through the entire focus range when I missed a subject and wasted a couple seconds, arrrgh!  Screw drive is what it is.  Once it acquired focus though, it didn't take many blurry shots.  It's pretty amazing actually, I was panning and tilting very quickly white shooting Canada geese and seagulls, but the camera kept them in focus.  With static subjects in good light, it's pretty quick.  In dim light it hunts, but there's little point in using an f/5.6 in low light. 

I'll post more bokeh examples later.  It's pretty nice in the bottom two pics (and in general) but sometimes it can look a bit funny.  Those two were at f/5.6, btw.


Overall, I'm impressed.

[phanophish]

Nice stuff.  That seals it, gotta get one.  I love the bokeh on the people shots in the park.  How fast is the focus with this lens on your camera (D300 correct?)

The D300's AF system definitely helps this lens out.  It was hard to get focus lock on flying birds, but that's mainly due to my lack of experience.  Frustratingly, the camera would drive the lens through the entire focus range when I missed a subject and wasted a couple seconds, arrrgh!  Screw drive is what it is.  Once it acquired focus though, it didn't take many blurry shots.  It's pretty amazing actually, I was panning and tilting very quickly white shooting Canada geese and seagulls, but the camera kept them in focus.  With static subjects in good light, it's pretty quick.  In dim light it hunts, but there's little point in using an f/5.6 in low light. 

I'll post more bokeh examples later.  It's pretty nice in the bottom two pics (and in general) but sometimes it can look a bit funny.  Those two were at f/5.6, btw.


Overall, I'm impressed.

Yea, I think for the money it seems like a total deal.  I'm not expecting it to be a low light lens at all.  It seems that for daylight stuff it does great which is all I would ever use it for....

[Frank in JC]

More examples...

I got points for this one 



Not as sharp as I'd like, but the AF tracking works as advertised!



Not much background blur, but pretty cool