Poor man's Angenieux - Tokina AT-X-Pro 28-70mm F2.6-2.8

[Bino]

Is this the correct lens? I received it today.

IMG_4125.jpgIMG_5470.jpg

[trispembo]

Yep, that's the version II with a bayonet mount.

[Bino]

Yep, that's the version II with a bayonet mount.

What's the image quality difference between this one and the version 1?

[Howie Roll]

I think you're cool so long as it's labelled 2.6-2.8. I think the grey area comes in on some of the foreign market (non US) models where it's still the Angenieux formula but only labelled f2.8.

[trispembo]

What's the image quality difference between this one and the version 1?

Very little difference as far as I can tell - but I've never had the f/2.6-2.8 Version I & II side by side.

I have had the Japanese market model (77mm filter f/2.8) Version I (screw hood) and Version II (bayonet hood) and tested them against the f/2.6-2.8 Version II (same as you have) and found them to be almost identical. Any difference I put down to sample variations rather than design variation. Out of the four copies I tested, the copy I settled on was the Japanese market Version I (screw hood, f/2.8) in Nikon mount. It seems if there is a difference between Version I & Version II (both f/2.6-2.8 & f/2.8 models) it may be the optical coatings. The optical formula/design appears to be identical.

That said, I did end up getting the Angenieux model rehoused by KimCamera in Korea, and will be using that one with my UM46kPL.

[Bino]

Very little difference as far as I can tell - but I've never had the f/2.6-2.8 Version I & II side by side.

I have had the Japanese market model (77mm filter f/2.8) Version I (screw hood) and Version II (bayonet hood) and tested them against the f/2.6-2.8 Version II (same as you have) and found them to be almost identical. Any difference I put down to sample variations rather than design variation. Out of the four copies I tested, the copy I settled on was the Japanese market Version I (screw hood, f/2.8) in Nikon mount. It seems if there is a difference between Version I & Version II (both f/2.6-2.8 & f/2.8 models) it may be the optical coatings. The optical formula/design appears to be identical.

That said, I did end up getting the Angenieux model rehoused by KimCamera in Korea, and will be using that one with my UM46kPL.

Thanks for the info.

[Bino]

To add some fuel into the flames Vic, I just received my Sigma F2.8 / 70-210 mm APO Zoom to compliment the long end :-)
Not exactly the Angenieux mojo, but still a similar very nice and vintage look

So now I'm covered from 28 to 210 mm @ f2.8.

Attachment 20686

Attachment 20687

Frank,

Is that Sigma 70-210 2.8 a EF Mount? I just purchased one and the owner says that only f/2.8 works on the newer cameras. Did you have to get yours rechipped to use the apertures with your URSA Mini 4.6K?

[bmpcc_bel]

Frank,

Is that Sigma 70-210 2.8 a EF Mount? I just purchased one and the owner says that only f/2.8 works on the newer cameras. Did you have to get yours rechipped to use the apertures with your URSA Mini 4.6K?

Out of curiosity, how much did you buy it?

[Frank Glencairn]

No EF Mount, I always get manual lenses - mine has a Nikon mount.

[Bino]

No EF Mount, I always get manual lenses - mine has a Nikon mount.

I couldn't find any. Thanks for the info.