Tokina 11-16mm - Page 8

Sanjin Jukic · 01-26-2009, 03:53 PM

Canon 10-22mm on RED1 quick and dirty test

(together with 75-300mm) but you will recognize what is what.

It's not so easy to deal with a super-wide angle for moving images.

Roberto Lequeux · 01-26-2009, 04:15 PM

I remember people mentioning the Canon as a spectacular lens image wise. Hey thanks for posting the footy... that canon is sharp! I wonder what an equal aperture comparison would reveal on a match up between the Tokina and Canon both at f3.5 11mm?

I think it costs about $200 more.

It is slower, and variable speed f3.5-4.5.

But if you need the widest FOV possible and don't mind f3.5 I guess the Canon still is best.

Tough f2.8 with ~10% less FOV is most likely the way most would go unless you absolutely positively needed the FOV.

Chris Swinbanks · 01-26-2009, 09:51 PM

Taking some information from early Red-thread days, which had the multiplication factor of ~ 1.47541 at 4k 2:1 for describing a still lens on a Red as an equivalent length, seems to equate the Tokina 11-16mm to be ~ 17-24mm fov. as Sanjin suggests.
My question, where does that put it against Red's 18-50mm PL mount lens.
Would you get expect to get roughly the same FOV from both lenses at widest zoom position, or should the same multiplication factor be applied to the Red lens? (ie, is the Red lens a true 18-50mm for the Mysterium sensor?)

Edit: meant Red's 18-50mm PL
So thinking here that the Tokina 11-16mm should be wider than the Red 18-50mm regardless of any multiplication factors, and therefore be a reasonably complementary lens that will have minimal (if any) equivalent FOV with the Red lens.

Joel Kaye · 01-26-2009, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Swinbanks

Taking some information from early Red-thread days, which had the multiplication factor of ~ 1.47541 at 4k 2:1 for describing a still lens on a Red as an equivalent length, seems to equate the Tokina 11-16mm to be ~ 17-24mm fov. as Sanjin suggests.
My question, where does that put it against Red's 17-40mm

Every 17mm lens has the same FOV on RED.

jimhare · 01-26-2009, 10:52 PM

Yeah, the Tokina at 11mm is much much wider than the Red at 18mm.

All relative. Say what you will about the specs but it looks mighty wide to me!

Roberto Lequeux · 01-26-2009, 11:08 PM

If the PL lens you are talking about is advertised as a 17-40mm then you would have to apply the same math to it to figure out how it would compare the way you are doing it.

Focal lengths are supposed to be based on full frame still photography 35mm. The Tokina is an 11-16mm the PL lens you are talking about should be a 17-40mm respectively. So at it's longest the Tokina should still be wider than the 17-40mm at its widest.

Chris Swinbanks · 01-26-2009, 11:40 PM

Thanks guys, what I expected, but reading through the thread threw me for a few moments about the measurement of PL mount lenses, and whether they would have the same thought process applied (marked for equivalent view for 8-perf 35mm film, ie stills or Vista) or be more correctly marked for full-width 4-perf 35mm motion picture film. ( a bit like F stops / T-stops)
So the assumption is they are all marked in relation to 8-perf frame size (correct me if I'm wrong)
I mistakenly wrote "17-40mm" rather than Red's standard 18-50mm PL mount lens, because someone knocked over our 1Ds MkII last night and busted the end off a 17-40mm L series... its sitting on my desk in a couple of parts and I'm wondering what to replace it with.... another 17-40mm or something else.
We have 2 others, but they are a good standard zoom to send out with several 20D's and the 1Ds we have.
We have a 10-22mm f3.5-4.5, but the Tokina's 2.8 aperture is appealing for use on Red... at the price.

Sanjin Jukic · 01-27-2009, 02:54 AM

Guys,

just to give you an idea about angles of view with different focal lengths,

the pictures taken from Tamron's lens calatog.

Hans von Sonntag · 01-27-2009, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USlatin

Focal lengths are supposed to be based on full frame still photography 35mm. The Tokina is an 11-16mm the PL lens you are talking about should be a 17-40mm respectively. So at it's longest the Tokina should still be wider than the 17-40mm at its widest.

Focal lenghts are focal lengths. They are not based upon any kind of "format". Changing the sensors size will affect FOV and eventually introduce vignetting/portholing.

Hans

Sanjin Jukic · 01-27-2009, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hans von Sonntag

Focal lenghts are focal lengths.

Hans

That's right.

But FoV (Field of Viev) and AoV (Angle of View) are different

and that's what you can see at the picture above.

Here FoV and AoV are to make impact on your choosing and decision which lens you would like to have.

01-26-2009, 03:53 PM	#71
Sanjin Jukic Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 6,854	Canon 10-22mm on RED1 quick and dirty test (together with 75-300mm) but you will recognize what is what. It's not so easy to deal with a super-wide angle for moving images. __________________ Sanjin Jukic - RED1 Camera Experimentalist "There is no point in having sharp images when you've fuzzy ideas." Jean-Luc Godard. Dynamic range is, after all, the measurement between well saturation (photosite blowout) and noise floor. Thom Hogan Digital Cinema Production Vienna-Austria

01-26-2009, 04:15 PM	#72
Roberto Lequeux Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,774	I remember people mentioning the Canon as a spectacular lens image wise. Hey thanks for posting the footy... that canon is sharp! I wonder what an equal aperture comparison would reveal on a match up between the Tokina and Canon both at f3.5 11mm? I think it costs about $200 more. It is slower, and variable speed f3.5-4.5. But if you need the widest FOV possible and don't mind f3.5 I guess the Canon still is best. Tough f2.8 with ~10% less FOV is most likely the way most would go unless you absolutely positively needed the FOV. __________________ Writer - Director

01-26-2009, 09:51 PM	#73
Chris Swinbanks Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 252	probably a silly question... Taking some information from early Red-thread days, which had the multiplication factor of ~ 1.47541 at 4k 2:1 for describing a still lens on a Red as an equivalent length, seems to equate the Tokina 11-16mm to be ~ 17-24mm fov. as Sanjin suggests. My question, where does that put it against Red's 18-50mm PL mount lens. Would you get expect to get roughly the same FOV from both lenses at widest zoom position, or should the same multiplication factor be applied to the Red lens? (ie, is the Red lens a true 18-50mm for the Mysterium sensor?) Edit: meant Red's 18-50mm PL So thinking here that the Tokina 11-16mm should be wider than the Red 18-50mm regardless of any multiplication factors, and therefore be a reasonably complementary lens that will have minimal (if any) equivalent FOV with the Red lens. __________________ logicAL "owls have happy feet too..."

01-26-2009, 11:08 PM	#76
Roberto Lequeux Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,774	If the PL lens you are talking about is advertised as a 17-40mm then you would have to apply the same math to it to figure out how it would compare the way you are doing it. Focal lengths are supposed to be based on full frame still photography 35mm. The Tokina is an 11-16mm the PL lens you are talking about should be a 17-40mm respectively. So at it's longest the Tokina should still be wider than the 17-40mm at its widest. __________________ Writer - Director

01-26-2009, 11:40 PM	#77
Chris Swinbanks Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 252	Thanks guys, what I expected, but reading through the thread threw me for a few moments about the measurement of PL mount lenses, and whether they would have the same thought process applied (marked for equivalent view for 8-perf 35mm film, ie stills or Vista) or be more correctly marked for full-width 4-perf 35mm motion picture film. ( a bit like F stops / T-stops) So the assumption is they are all marked in relation to 8-perf frame size (correct me if I'm wrong) I mistakenly wrote "17-40mm" rather than Red's standard 18-50mm PL mount lens, because someone knocked over our 1Ds MkII last night and busted the end off a 17-40mm L series... its sitting on my desk in a couple of parts and I'm wondering what to replace it with.... another 17-40mm or something else. We have 2 others, but they are a good standard zoom to send out with several 20D's and the 1Ds we have. We have a 10-22mm f3.5-4.5, but the Tokina's 2.8 aperture is appealing for use on Red... at the price. __________________ logicAL "owls have happy feet too..."

01-26-2009, 10:52 PM	#75
jimhare Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 2,104	Yeah, the Tokina at 11mm is much much wider than the Red at 18mm. All relative. Say what you will about the specs but it looks mighty wide to me!

01-27-2009, 02:54 AM	#78
Sanjin Jukic Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 6,854	Guys, just to give you an idea about angles of view with different focal lengths, the pictures taken from Tamron's lens calatog. __________________ Sanjin Jukic - RED1 Camera Experimentalist "There is no point in having sharp images when you've fuzzy ideas." Jean-Luc Godard. Dynamic range is, after all, the measurement between well saturation (photosite blowout) and noise floor. Thom Hogan Digital Cinema Production Vienna-Austria

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode