What is the difference between the AT-X116 PRO-DX II and the AT-X Pro DX for this lens?
1704106
"Tokina has announced an updated version of its highly-regarded 11-16mm F2.8 wideangle zoom for APS-C SLRs. The AT-X 116 PRO DX II adds a 'Silent Drive-Module' (SD-M) focus motor that enables it to autofocus on all Nikon SLRs. The latest version also includes improved surface coatings (which are particularly important for wide-angle lenses) and adds a 'GMR' sensor to locate the focus element's current position, to speed up autofocus - a technology first introduced on the AT-X 16-28 F2.8 PRO FX full-frame wide-angle."
1704107
For years I wanted to buy the original AT-X1166 PRO-DX until the "DX II" came out. I have this for use with my D90/D7000 and it's fantastic. I believe the difference is the new version has Tokina's version of AF-S for high-speed quiet autofocus whereas the original did not.
1704108
The II is the newest version. The Canon version is roughly identical in the DX & DX II, however the Nikon version has added functionality from the DX to the DX II, I believe by making auto focusing is now functional on all Nikon Cameras
1074279
I believe, the at-x pro fx in it's name refers to it having been engineered for the full frame camera. The full frame shooter benefits the most. Sorry, I don't have a substitute recommendation. I only buy Canon or Tokina.
747876
Sorry but I don't know much about the difference in lens. I have only owned these ones. The lens are a pretty decent size. Just by looking at the picture of the GR004's it seems like these ones may just be larger.
1346987
One of the most important differences is the auto focus motor location. The D40X does not have an auto focus motor in the body of the camera. Therefore, you must buy the very pricey lenses with an auto focus built into the lense itself. The body of the D80 has an auto focus motor built right into the camera body. Also, the D80 usually comes with a 18-135 lense instead of a 18-55 that the D40X has. I hope this helps! :-)
1606296
I've had both. They both have the same light gathering abilities, but the version II is smaller and is a bit better optically the the original 14-42, although I think you'd be hard pressed to see the difference in most situations. The version II is a smoother lens, mechanically.
1309661
The lens that I bought was for a D5200 . Dx mount. It works on my D7100 also.Like I said Dx mount not Fx.
775682
This is a question to ask a specific seller about a specific lens. This venue is better for questions about the model of lens itself.
1848178
Not sure. I have a tamron 17-50, which is a dx lens and not bad but am selling it anyway to upgrade to an fx lens.
1640068
From what I can tell, the cheaper version is smaller and lighter. But, I don't know if that necessarily makes it a better lens. Here is the link to sigmas page for the more expensive lens: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/18-200mm-f35-63-ii-dc-os-hsm And here is the link to the less expensive one: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/18-200mm-f35-63-dc-macro-os-hsm-c I have the more expensive lens, and I have used it exclusively since I bought it. I've never shot with the other one though, so I can't accurately compare one to the other.
669396
Nothing, same lens, same quality and you get extras to boot. I was Leary when ordering due to the big difference in price, but it's the same lens.
839198
You would get a lot more bang for fewer bucks by replacing the D-90 body (12.4 mpix DX format) with a new D-610 (24.3 mpix FX format) if your 200 mm lens is in that format also, i.e., if it is the 70-200 FX zoom. Plus, HD video and faster internal processing.
1829252
I have both lenses. My experience is that both provides same good image quality. Lack of OIS i do not know.. I use the 25 mm more than the 45 mm now since i can use it for portraits by moving a bit and also "normal" day to day use
1707170
I could not find a difference so I went with the cheaper lens and it has been very good. Since I don't have the II to compare I can't say for sure.. My only complaint on this lens is that the focus motor is noisy when shooting video On the canon 5i.. that could be a problem with all the lens.
1820410
This lens is entirely different from the kit lens. And we don't know what kit lens you are talking about. Of the 40D? of the XT? I got the XT and the 40D. Both came with a 17?-55mm and a 28-135mm IS. The 50mm lens is a different lens all together because it doesn't zoom so you'll be doing a lot of moving back and forward with your feet. The nice thing about this lens is that pictures are RAZOR SHARP. I mean I've never seen pictures sharper than what this lens has produced. I bought 2 of these lenses because I really love the pictures they take. Also, this lens can take pictures in a dark room about 10 times as easy as the kit lens on the 40D or the XT. The f/1.8 is amazing. The color, the light, the picture sharpness = worth $70 by far. GET IT. :)
1790371
Yes, the two lenses are worlds apart. The 70-300 is a top quality 'prosumer' lens, intended for advanced amateurs and pros on a budget; worth every penny! The 55-200 is an affordable, 'entry level' lens and an excellent value.
827330
It is a DX lens...works great on my D7000 & D90....sharp and beautiful color.
2041778
There are a couple of differences, but the real question is what are your needs as a photographer? I'm guessing that since you are asking what the differences are between these lenses, your needs are not of the professional nature, but I don't want to assume. The F1.2 is a pro lens. It is a stop faster, has sharper optics, manual focus override with just a twist of the lens, and from what I've heard nicer bokeh. Generally Canon puts everything it has into its "L" lenses. Better optics, build quality, and finish. I do not own the F1.2. I don't need it. To quote a friend of mine that shoots models all day in L.A., "If someone hadn't stolen my F1.4, I would not have purchased the F1.2". For someone who shoots portrait and magazine covers all day and makes a living at it, the subtle differences of the F1.2 are worth the extra money. For someone like me, who shoots portraits on occasion or shots for web sites etc., the F1.4 is a wonderful lens. It's very fast, handles well, and produces great photos. Not to discount the F1.2; it is an amazing lens and if money were no object of course I would own it. Hope this helps. Happy shooting!