Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

PL Mount 11-16mm f2.8 Prototype, Manual Iris

Matthew Duclos said:
I suppose you're right. With the RED 18mm or the Zeiss ZF 18mm, there is still a need for that extra bit of wide angle.



I've not bench tested other Tokina lenses but the Tokina 11-16mm has a surprisingly stable image while zooming and focusing. The mechanics are nice and solid (compared to canon/nikon) and Tokina even thought to include optical adjustments for collimating and axial alignment in the lens design.

As of now, we are working on making the aperture scale a little more usable. Since the lens does not come with an aperture scale or ring, the mechanical movement is rather limited. But no worries, we're working on it.
Click to expand...

thanks Mr. Duclos. I'd be curious to see how the other 2 Tokinas would perform on the bench. I'm aware of people's sense that the 16-50 is not as nice as Sigma's--but there appears to be a lot of sample variation and Tokina's next lens up the line is supposed to be pretty good.

Re: sample variation: it always seems a good idea to send slr lenses (and slr bodies!) in for calibration, with quite an improvement coming back. What I'm getting at is that I would expect the PL mount Tokina 11-16 (and other zooms if done) that you're working on to perform better than the brand new, fresh out of the box 11-16 that entered it. And...I'd be curious to see what the other Tokina's would deliver. 3 zooms going from 11 - 150 (that might be color matched?), each light enough for steadicam/handheld, in the ballpark of $10k would be nice. Tokina's main problems in their reviews tend to be focusing and calibration issues--the former not a big deal for our purposes and the latter probably correctable during the PL conversion process.

p

The lack of QC from Tokina, Canon, Nikon, etc. is irritating.
 
Seriously Matts,

Who can I send a lens and a check to?
 
Tokina zoom 11-16 2.8 Pl mount lens test

Tokina zoom 11-16 2.8 Pl mount lens test

A couple of weeks ago Matt Uhry stopped by my house to show me his Tokina 11-16 2.8 Pl mount lens.

At the beginning I was a little apprehensive about it...a still photo lens on my Red package? No way!!!

When he took it out the case and I saw the PL mount on it I started to change my mind, but it was once we fitted on the camera and shot with it when I realized the potential of this lens.

We shot a focus chart with my 16mm Standard Zeiss (just got serviced) and then we shot with the Tokina (wide open-2.8) at both 16mm and 11mm.

That was when the quality of the optics really changed they way I looked at the lens.

Distortion is almost not existent.
Sharpness for corner to corner is almost perfect.
And I you can see the difference of sharpness compare to the Zeiss is very minimal
Below I posted some pics from test so you can judge by yourself.

Conclusion:
It's an incredible value, the optics of this lens are surprisingly good and the mechanics are at the upper end of the AF still lenses. While focus throw does not compare with a 14mm Ultraprime, the ultraprime cost's $12,000 and the Tokia does the job of a 12mm, 14mm and 16mm. A reasonable trade off for saving tens of thousands of dollars.
 
thanks for the test!!

but WTF MATT!!! you have been holding out on us for weeks!!!!
sooo unfair.....so who do I send the check to?
 
Paul Hazlett said:
thanks for the test!!

but WTF MATT!!! you have been holding out on us for weeks!!!!
sooo unfair.....so who do I send the check to?
Click to expand...

As fun as the prototype is to play around with ( are you in LA ? we maybe could arrange a play-date ) The version the Duclos family is working on is going to be better.

It's not a tease, not vaporware. Perhaps just a little patience ?

Matt
www.mattuhry.com
 
another buyer here,

possible these be available in the next 2 months?
 
distance from camera

distance from camera

USlatin said:
How far were you standing from the camera on that shot?
Click to expand...

I was probably 6-7ft. away from camera.
More interesting than that to me in that shot is how little distortion the lens has on the corners


Ruben F. Russ
Cinematographer
 
Matt Uhry said:
As fun as the prototype is to play around with ( are you in LA ? we maybe could arrange a play-date ) The version the Duclos family is working on is going to be better.

It's not a tease, not vaporware. Perhaps just a little patience ?

Matt
www.mattuhry.com
Click to expand...

Filmarte said:
I am sorry, it was me, that slacked on posting this info.

Ruben F. Russ.
Cinematographer
Click to expand...


just having a bit of guys...hehheh....take your time....but not that much!
I am a big fan of the wide end so this setup is really got me stoked!

Thanks for the effort
 
Thanks for the link, I hadn't read that one.

I am not 100% sure I know how to read those but it seems they put a lot of emphasis into the corners and the most distorted areas of the image are in the centers of the edges, correct? Too bad they didn't include the chart for 12mm and 13mm! And, as the review says, it seems that at 14mm it is practically perfect already, with 16mm being almost literal perfect. This is great...

I wonder what the 11mm corrected 1080p out of 4k would look like? I assume most the sharpness would be re-gained, and I assume that at 14mm you would have unnoticeable sharpness loss, perhaps even at close inspection from a trained person? Could that be the case for 11mm?

I know I am taking this a bit far, but if you had the effects stored for each mm increment, and could somehow add clicks to the lens... I would assume that it could help when intercutting with optically stunning primes. Especially with even more resolution at 5k.

It would also be interesting if used with FF35 to be able to switch to 6k using the full sensor and shoot at 15mm where even a 16:9 would avoid vignetting. If shooting for 2.4 you might even be able to get the 14mm to work. Plus the added resolution for the correction...

And isn't 16mm in FF already 180 degrees?

I would appreciate it if someone could correct any misunderstandings I may have so I can know if I am getting the full picture, but this sounds like a phenomenal no-brainer buy any way you look at it. Even if you work with nothing but the biggest clients on MPs, cause that that level this price is buying chewing gum and it would make a kick butt stunt lens, like inside a car for a crash shooting 6k at 100fps on Epic FF... yeah baby!
 
USlatin said:
And isn't 16mm in FF already 180 degrees?
Click to expand...

The 16mm fisheye lenses are 180 degrees on fullframe.

16mm rectilinear is 107 degrees FOV on fullframe.
 
We love our Tokina 11-16mm on the Nikon mount. . . just love it. . . it's an utterly amazing lens for the money.

Stephen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top