A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 Vs...

Featured Equipment Deals

DSLR Release Modes and Exposure (Video Tutorial) Read More

DSLR Release Modes and Exposure (Video Tutorial)

This week's video tutorial will explain what your DSLR's shutter release modes, exposure metering, and exposure compensation controls do, how you control them, and when to use them.

Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 Vs Tokina 20-35mm F3.5-4.5 for Elan II

Sanath Perera , Apr 24, 2004; 12:40 p.m.

Is there is a big difference between these two lenses in terms of optical quality?

Tokina 19-35mm replaced Tokina 20-35mm. 20-35mm is heavier and better built. I can buy a new Tokina 19-35mm or a used Tokina 20-35mm for the same price. I am little uncomfortable buying a used Tokina 20- 35mm because KEH does not say whether they have the version I or II of the lens. I know version II is compatible with Elan II but does not whether version I is compatible or not. Also KEH have some lenses at 72mm filter size and others at 77mm filter size. I will prefer to buy the current model (19-35mm) new, unless 20-35mm is clearly better optically?


Robert Davis , Apr 24, 2004; 02:46 p.m.

Although I cannot give you an opinion on the 20-35mm version, I owned the 19-35mm version for more than a year. It worked well on my EOS 3 and I was impressed with the optical performance considering the price. My suggestion is, if the prices are similiar, why risk an incompatibility?

A word of advice -- treat the lens carefully. It isn't built very well (which is safe to assume considering the price). My version developed a small crack near the filer ring. It still worked well, but I know dust is getting in there.

Best of luck!

Rick Helmke , Apr 24, 2004; 04:15 p.m.

I can't speak to the 20-35 but the 19-35 is quite good. I am using it on a 300D, 10D and an Elan 7. It seems happy on all of them and has given tack sharp images. You can't argue the price. I think this is an often overlooked good deal for a lens in this category.

Rick H.

Jim Mueller , Apr 24, 2004; 05:18 p.m.

Canon also makes a 20-35 Zoom. I would be more inclined to buy the Canon Model.

Sanath Perera , Apr 24, 2004; 06:10 p.m.

Canon 20-35 is more twice the price of the Tokina 19-35. I hear they are similar in optical quality.

Volker Hett , Apr 24, 2004; 07:54 p.m.

I've got a 20-35 with 72mm filter for 89 Euro. Don't know if it's Mk1 or 2 but it works fine on my d60. Af is reasonably fast and a bit noisy compared to a Canon 20-35. I put up a gallery with my first pics here and some party pics here and here. Theres a lot of crap in the albums, I didn't have time to edit them and I hadn't had anything to bounce my 420ex to trick E-TTL.

Have fun

Canon D60, Tokina 20-35/f3.5-4.5, 420ex

Mikael Latorre , Apr 26, 2004; 04:48 a.m.

In that range I´ve used the Canon EF 16-35/2.8L USM, EF 17-35/2.8L USM, Canon EF 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM, Tokina AF 20-35/3.5-4.5 II and the Tokina AF 19-35/3.5-4.5.

If the Tokina AF 20-35/3.5-4.5 has an orange ring at the front It´s the mark II version, otherwise not.

This version is an excellent choice in this price range, a little bit noisy AF but it does the job well. It´s very well built and uses 77mm filters. I normally use It with a Hoya S-HMC Skylight 1B filter or a Hoya circular-polarizing filter, the normal one not the more expensive thin 3mm thick version. It works just fine.

The 20-35 doesn´t collect dust very easily, a big plus! Works well wide open but stopped down one or two stops make the pictures better. Closest focusing distance 0.40m, most of the time that´s close enough. The lens shade (for both 19-35 and 20-35) is not that great, they keep the light out fairly well but they can be a little bit loose. A thing that surprised me was that I didn´t get a wider view with the 19-35 than with my 20-35 ??? why?..I don´t know. I normally use my lenses with a Canon EOS 1V-HS body, so I have a 100% view In my viewfinder. My 19-35 lens was not at all as good as the 20-35 lens, In any way! The 20-35 was sharper, better built, didn´t vignette as easily as the 19-35, the AF worked a little bit faster. A better lens...I think. Maybe I got a good 20-35 sample and a bad 19-35 sample, I don´t know but I just tell you what i´ve experienced.

A few important things; If you can try the 19-35 and the 20-35 at the same place.

1: Check the AF speed, It should be more or less the same. If the 20-35 works more slowly, the Af could be fawlty. I would hesitate to buy it.

2: The used lens should not have a lot of dust inside(look through the lens) If It has, the former owner didn´t take enough care. Don´t buy it !

3: You really need the lens hood, the one I got with my lens is the BH-771. You can buy it separately but it´s not always easy to find. 4: It´s my experience that the 19-35 is an inferior lens, I wouldn´t buy It if I planned to keep the lens for a long time. It´s better to try and find a used Tokina AF 20-35/3.5-4.5 II or even better a Canon EF 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM, used or new.

5: If everything seems to be ok, buy it and enjoy!

Marco L , Nov 13, 2007; 08:43 a.m.

As this article is already old, i would just like to add a comment about the Tokina 20-35mm. First i didnt know which version I had, as i thought it was the 2nd version, while it has a orange ring.

While there are 2 versions of the 20-35mm 1:3.5-4.5, and BOTH have the orange ring in front. Now im the owner of both versions, and can tell the differences. 1.The differences are: 72mm (first version) vs 77mm (second version). 2.The older version has a DOF scale, while the II doesnt have this. 3.And the older version the front element rotates, where the IInd version doesnt. I hope you can now easily notice the difference between these 2. optical differnce i dont know, i didnt run a test.

Back to top

Notify me of Responses