A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Featured Equipment Deals

Portrait Photography - Part II (Video Tutorial) Read More

Portrait Photography - Part II (Video Tutorial)

Learn the basics of Portrait Photography in Part II of this video tutorial, covering the essentials on timing, posing, and cropping.

Latest Equipment Articles

From Light to Ink: An Exhibit Using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers Read More

From Light to Ink: An Exhibit Using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers

"From Light to Ink" featured the work of Canon Inspirers and contest winners, all printed using Canon's imagePROGRAF printers. The gallery show revolved around the discussion of printing photographs...

Latest Learning Articles

How to Get the Most Out of a Photography Workshop Read More

How to Get the Most Out of a Photography Workshop

Attending a photography workshop can be a great way to take your images to the next level, but it can also be a big investment in time, money, and travel. By following these 7 simple tips, you can...

Tokina 35-300mm?

J Pearson , Jun 14, 2005; 02:00 a.m.

Hello, this is my first post here. I have a Maxxum 7000 with a 50mm lens and I've been wanting to get a longer range zoom lens. There is a Tokina 35-300mm lens that I can acquire for not too much, but I know absolutely nothing about this lens. Can anyone tell me anything about it, and if I would be better off just buying a 75-300 zoom and something smaller like a 35-105? Thanks!


Jorgen Udvang , Jun 14, 2005; 02:56 a.m.

Zooms that span over too much will struggle to be sharp and will never be fast. Still, Tokina has a 24-200mm that has a good reputation and (in my view) a more useful zoom-range. It's rather heavy though. Even better is the Tamron 24-135mm, and a nice compination with an 80-400.

Bill Tuthill , Jun 14, 2005; 01:31 p.m.

The Tokina 35-300 is one of the worst lenses ever made. Look at photodo.com and figure out why it gets a 0.3 composite score for sharpness! If you really want an ultrazoom, the Tamron 28-300 is the least bad of the lot. The Minolta 35-105 is much better, and very lightweight.

Brian Southward , Jun 15, 2005; 05:22 a.m.

If you've not used the 300mm focal length before, it's worth noting that it's outside the range that most people can hand-hold. I can manage comfortably up to about 200mm, so I find an 80-200 (or thereabouts) zoom a good walkabout lens. If you go the extra distance to 300mm, you'll probably need a tripod to get sharp images, and that slows you down sufficiently that you might as well dispense with the convenience of an all-in-one superzoom and get a couple or three lenses.

And I don't know the Tokina 35-300 but its reputation isn't encouraging.

Brian Markowitz , Jun 15, 2005; 11:20 a.m.

Personally I do not like the Tokina lens. My friend has one (an older model) and the zoom, instead of a turn ring, is a slide. So when he focuses on something in a downward angle the barrel moves and makes it tough to take the picture.

I have the Sigma 28-300 and love it. I was using the 28-200 and loved that, wanted more lengh and bought the 28-300. These are excellent lenses (imho). I am actually looking to sell the 28-200 with a skylight filter to match it. If your interested, drop me a line.

Demetri P. , Jun 15, 2005; 05:21 p.m.

Please see: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007BdS. I got rid of mine (which didn't work on newer maxxums until rechipped) since I had a tamron 28-200 XR that I liked better

Back to top

Notify me of Responses