Tokina Super Wide Angle 12-24mm f/4 - DOF Question

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Dave, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. Dave

    Dave Guest

    Hey there,

    I was hoping to get testimonials about the Tokina lens' Depth Of Field
    abilities. I recently bought the Canon Super Wide 10-22 f/3.5 - 4.5
    and I'm displeased with it's DOF abilities. I've tried shooting both
    with AF and MF, with varying small apertures, ISO's, ... and I'm just
    not getting what I need from this lens. It's a shame as the lens if
    performing quite well otherwise (barrel distortions, CAs, MTF
    Res, ...).

    I had posted a comparative (Sigma vs Canon) Wide Angle lens question a
    couple of weeks ago - to which I received a bunch of great replies -
    so I guess this is somewhat related.

    Thanks a lot, dave
    Dave, Nov 20, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dave

    frederick Guest

    It won't be any different for DOF at same focal length and
    aperture. For good DOF control with extra wide lenses,
    switch AF off and focus manually.
    frederick, Nov 20, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dave

    acl Guest

    Yes, it should be the same for the same focal length, f/stop and focus
    distance, But what, exactly, is the OP's problem? Not enough DOF? Too
    much? Wrong range in focus? I am not sure I understood.
    acl, Nov 20, 2007
  4. DOF does not vary significantly with the lens quality (within reason). Your
    Canon lens is fine.

    If you want the maximum DOF in landscape work, turn off AF (set the lens to
    MF), set the focus distance on the lens to 1 meter, use f/16, and use the
    wide end of the range (16mm and wider). You should find that your images are
    sharp from quite close to infinity. You might prefer f/11 for sharpness, at
    which point you may want to stick to focal lengths closer to 10mm.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Nov 21, 2007
  5. Dave

    Dave Guest

    Perhaps i should not had left it as implied but not enough DOF of
    course. I was shooting over the entire range 10mm - 22mm, but saw the
    worst DOF at 10mm. I was manually focusing too far away possibly, so
    I'll try David J's suggestion. thanks David J. and frederick!

    Oh i'm up in the seattle area and lighting is pretty low these days -
    so I may have to use my monopod or tripod to go above f10 i guess.

    Dave, Nov 21, 2007
  6. Dave

    frederick Guest

    You should/could be able to hand hold at 1/16th second or
    less at 10mm or so.
    That varies from person to person, shot to shot. If you're
    anticipating shooting at around that shutter speed, then
    yes, a tripod is a good idea.
    frederick, Nov 21, 2007
  7. Dave

    Paul Furman Guest

    One meter is a bit close unless he has foreground even closer than that.
    I haven't really used hyperfocal tables but it might be worth glancing
    at some to get a feel for it (multiply by 1.6x for crop factor). The
    basic idea is to focus a somewhat closer than the middle of the area you
    want in focus because except for macro, there tends to be a deeper focus
    behind the point of focus than in front.

    Ah, OK David L., sorry, 10mm at f/16 focused at 1m does indeed look fine
    at infinity up to 0.24m
    For a 19 inch print at f/8, 2 meters does the trick!
    Paul Furman, Nov 21, 2007
  8. Dave

    Toby Guest

    You should google up "hyperfocal distance" and study the concept.
    Toby, Nov 21, 2007
  9. Dave

    Paul E Guest

    On a Canon EOS DSLR, f16 is way too small: anything below about f10 is liable to degrade the image through diffraction.

    Maybe that's part of the OP's problem - trying to get too much DoF.

    As for the focusing distance, a 12mm lens @ f9.5 focused at 4.5ft will have everything just about as sharp as possible from 2ft to
    the horizon for prints up to 12*8in @ 300ppi.

    Paul Edstein
    Paul E, Nov 21, 2007
  10. Dave

    Tony Polson Guest

    From your posting, I suspect you don't actually know the meaning of
    the term "depth of field".

    You have presented no evidence of anything that would indicate what
    the problem is, but I suspect that it isn't a "depth of field"
    Tony Polson, Nov 21, 2007
  11. In what way are you "displeased with its DOF abilities"?

    Any lens of the same focal length and aperture used on the same format and
    in the same circumstances will give you the same depth of field. I have the
    Tokina 12-24 and it's great, its depth of field is great too, but at the
    same focal lengths etc. your Canon 10-22 would be exactly the same as far as
    DOF is concerned.


    Neil Harrington, Nov 21, 2007
  12. Dave

    Dave Guest

    When i said displeased by DOF performance I was referring to things
    are out of focus far away when using f8 - f13 with my Canon 10-22
    lens. My other lenses (Canon 17-85, 70-300) are sharper both close up
    and far off - when using the same f-stops.

    I've learned a lot of things in this mail and I'll read up on all of
    them / try them out over the weekend.

    So I'm good now, thanks, dave
    Dave, Nov 21, 2007
  13. Dave

    Yoshi Guest

    DOF is a function of the focal length of the lens and the aperture. It is a
    matter of optical physics, not a performance factor that should vary from
    one brand of lens to another.

    Yoshi, Nov 22, 2007
  14. Dave

    Steve Dell Guest

    I have the Tokina 12-24 f/4. I have found that at f/11 or f/16 as David says
    below to be the sharpest when focused as suggested.

    Steve Dell, Nov 22, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.