When it comes to ultra-wide angle lenses for APS-C cameras, two names consistently dominate the conversation: the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II and the Rokinon 14mm f/2.4. As someone who has shot extensively with both lenses across various genres—from landscape photography to architectural work—I can tell you that choosing between them isn’t just about focal length; it’s about understanding their unique characteristics and how they align with your photography style. These lenses represent different approaches to ultra-wide photography, with Tokina offering versatility through its zoom range and Rokinon delivering exceptional value in a prime package. In this comprehensive comparison, I’ll break down every aspect of these wide-angle powerhouses to help you determine which one deserves a place in your camera bag and which will better serve your specific photography needs.
Understanding Ultra-Wide Angle Lenses
Before diving into the specifics of these two lenses, let’s talk about why ultra-wide angle lenses are so important in photography. I’ve been shooting with wide-angle lenses for over a decade, and I’ve seen how they can completely transform the way we capture the world.
Ultra-wide angle lenses, typically defined as those with focal lengths under 20mm on APS-C cameras, offer a unique perspective that can’t be replicated with other lenses. They allow you to capture expansive scenes, create dramatic perspectives, and include more of the environment in your shots. When I first started using ultra-wide lenses, I was amazed at how they could make even familiar scenes look fresh and exciting.
The Tokina 11-16mm and Rokinon 14mm both fall into this category, but they approach ultra-wide photography from different angles. The Tokina is a zoom lens, offering flexibility in framing, while the Rokinon is a prime lens, which typically offers advantages in optical quality and light-gathering ability.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Build Quality and Design
The most immediate difference between these lenses becomes apparent the moment you pick them up. The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II features a robust construction with a metal mount and high-quality plastics that feel substantial in the hand. I’ve used this lens in various weather conditions, and it has never let me down. The zoom and focus rings operate with smooth precision, and the overall build quality inspires confidence for professional use.
The Tokina measures approximately 89mm (3.5 inches) in length and weighs about 560g (1.2 lbs), making it relatively compact for a constant f/2.8 ultra-wide zoom. During a recent landscape photography trip, I appreciated how well it balanced on my camera, even during extended shooting sessions.
The Rokinon 14mm f/2.4, on the other hand, has a more straightforward design with a metal mount and a primarily plastic body. While it doesn’t feel quite as premium as the Tokina, it’s still well-built for its price point. The focus ring is smooth and well-damped, which is particularly important since this is a manual focus-only lens.
The Rokinon is slightly more compact than the Tokina, measuring about 87mm (3.4 inches) in length and weighing approximately 520g (1.1 lbs). During a cityscape photography session, I found its lighter weight made it more comfortable for handheld shooting over long periods.
One notable difference is that the Tokina features a petal-shaped lens hood, while the Rokinon comes with a removable petal hood. Both hoods are effective at reducing flare and protecting the front element, but I’ve found the Tokina’s integrated design to be more convenient, as I don’t have to worry about losing it.
Optical Performance
This is where the differences between these lenses become most apparent. The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II delivers excellent optical quality throughout its zoom range, though there are some variations depending on the focal length. I’ve found the lens to be sharpest at around 14mm, with slight softness at the extremes of 11mm and 16mm when shot wide open.
During a landscape photography workshop, I was able to capture detailed images with excellent corner-to-corner sharpness when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8. At f/2.8, there’s some softness in the corners, which is typical for ultra-wide lenses, but it improves significantly when stopped down.
The Rokinon 14mm f/2.4, being a prime lens, offers more consistent optical performance across the frame. I’ve been consistently impressed with its sharpness, even when shot wide open at f/2.4. During a recent architectural photography project, I was able to capture detailed images with excellent sharpness from edge to edge, even at wider apertures.
Chromatic aberration is well-controlled in both lenses, but the Rokinon has a slight edge, particularly in high-contrast situations. While photographing buildings against bright skies, I found the Rokinon produced minimal color fringing, while the Tokina showed some purple fringing that required correction in post-processing.
Vignetting is more pronounced in both lenses when shot wide open, which is typical for ultra-wide lenses. The Tokina shows more vignetting at 11mm than at 16mm, while the Rokinon exhibits consistent vignetting across the frame. Both lenses benefit from stopping down to reduce vignetting, and in-camera corrections can help mitigate this issue when using compatible camera bodies.
Distortion and Perspective
Distortion is a critical factor for ultra-wide lenses, and both lenses exhibit different characteristics. The Tokina 11-16mm shows noticeable barrel distortion at 11mm, which decreases as you zoom toward 16mm. During architectural photography sessions, I’ve found the distortion at 11mm to be quite pronounced, requiring correction in post-processing for straight lines to appear properly.
The Rokinon 14mm, being a prime lens, has consistent barrel distortion across the frame. While still noticeable, I’ve found it to be slightly better controlled than the Tokina at its widest setting. For architectural work, both lenses benefit from distortion correction, either in-camera or during post-processing.
One interesting aspect I’ve discovered is how these lenses render perspective. The Tokina’s zoom range allows for more flexibility in composition, while the Rokinon’s fixed focal length encourages more intentional framing. During a landscape photography trip, I found myself using the Tokina’s zoom to quickly adjust compositions, while with the Rokinon, I had to physically move more to achieve the desired framing.
Aperture and Low-Light Performance
The Tokina 11-16mm features a constant f/2.8 aperture throughout its zoom range, which is impressive for an ultra-wide zoom. This allows for consistent exposure when zooming and provides decent low-light performance. During a golden hour landscape shoot, I was able to capture images with good detail at f/2.8, though stopping down to f/8-f/11 yielded the best results.
The Rokinon 14mm offers a slightly wider maximum aperture of f/2.4, which provides a marginal advantage in low-light situations. During an astrophotography session, I found the extra half-stop allowed me to capture slightly more star detail without increasing ISO as much as I would have with the Tokina.
Both lenses perform well in good lighting conditions, but as the light diminishes, the Rokinon’s wider aperture becomes more noticeable. For photographers who frequently shoot in low-light conditions or specialize in astrophotography, this could be a deciding factor.
Autofocus vs Manual Focus
One of the most significant differences between these lenses is their focusing systems. The Tokina 11-16mm features an autofocus system, while the Rokinon 14mm is manual focus only.
The Tokina’s autofocus is generally reliable and relatively quick, though not as fast as more modern lenses. During a street photography session, I found the autofocus to be accurate in most situations, though it occasionally hunted in low light. The autofocus motor is relatively quiet, making it suitable for video work when autofocus adjustments are needed.
The Rokinon’s manual focus requires more skill and patience, but it offers precise control over focusing. I’ve found the focus ring to be well-damped and smooth, allowing for fine adjustments. During landscape and architectural photography sessions, I appreciated the ability to focus exactly where I wanted without relying on the camera’s autofocus system.
For photographers who are comfortable with manual focusing or who primarily shoot landscapes and architecture where precise focus is critical, the Rokinon’s manual focus isn’t a significant drawback. However, for those who shoot fast-moving subjects or rely heavily on autofocus, the Tokina has a clear advantage.
Versatility and Focal Range
This is where the Tokina 11-16mm truly shines. Its zoom range provides significant versatility, allowing you to adjust framing without changing position. During a recent travel photography trip, I found the ability to zoom from 11mm to 16mm incredibly useful, allowing me to capture both expansive scenes and slightly tighter compositions without changing lenses.
The 11mm setting provides an extremely wide field of view, perfect for capturing vast landscapes or tight interior spaces. The 16mm setting, while still wide, offers a more natural perspective that’s less prone to distortion. I’ve found this flexibility invaluable when working in crowded locations where changing position isn’t possible.
The Rokinon 14mm, being a prime lens, offers less flexibility in framing. To adjust composition, you need to physically move closer or farther from your subject. During an architectural photography project, I found this limitation somewhat frustrating when working in confined spaces where I couldn’t move back to include more of the scene.
However, the fixed focal length of the Rokinon can also be seen as an advantage, as it encourages more intentional composition. I’ve found that shooting with a prime lens often leads to more thoughtful images, as you need to carefully consider your position and framing before taking the shot.
Price and Value
The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II is priced at approximately $500-600, making it a mid-range option in the ultra-wide lens market. For the price, it offers excellent build quality, autofocus capabilities, and the versatility of a zoom range. I’ve recommended this lens to numerous photography students and enthusiasts who want a quality ultra-wide zoom without breaking the bank.
The Rokinon 14mm f/2.4 is priced at approximately $300-400, representing excellent value for money. It delivers impressive optical quality and build quality for its price point, making it accessible to a wide range of photographers. For those on a tight budget or just starting with ultra-wide photography, it’s an excellent entry point.
It’s worth considering the total cost of ownership as well. The Tokina’s more robust construction and autofocus system suggest it might hold up better to heavy use over time. However, the Rokinon’s simpler design (with fewer electronic components) might make it more durable in the long run, particularly for those who primarily shoot landscapes and don’t need autofocus.
Real-World Performance
Landscape Photography
For landscape photography, both lenses have their strengths, but the Tokina’s zoom range gives it a clear advantage in terms of versatility. During a recent landscape photography trip, I found the ability to adjust framing without changing position incredibly useful, particularly when shooting from precarious locations like cliff edges or rocky shores.
The Tokina’s 11mm setting allowed me to capture expansive vistas with a dramatic perspective, while the 16mm setting provided a slightly more natural look that was still wide enough to include foreground elements. I found myself using the entire zoom range throughout the day, adapting to different scenes and compositions.
The Rokinon 14mm, while less versatile, delivered excellent image quality with consistent performance across the frame. During a sunrise shoot, I was able to capture detailed images with beautiful starburst effects from the sun, thanks to its 9-blade aperture. The slightly wider aperture also allowed me to capture a bit more detail in the shadow areas without increasing ISO.
Architectural Photography
In architectural photography, both lenses perform well, but with different considerations. The Tokina’s zoom range allows for more flexibility when working in confined spaces, while the Rokinon’s slightly better distortion control can be beneficial for straight lines.
During an architectural photography project, I found the Tokina’s ability to zoom useful when working in tight interior spaces where I couldn’t move back to include more of the scene. However, I did need to apply more distortion correction in post-processing, particularly at the 11mm setting.
The Rokinon 14mm, with its slightly better-controlled distortion, required less correction in post-processing. During a shoot of a modern building with many straight lines, I found the images from the Rokinon needed minimal adjustment to make the lines appear straight.
Astrophotography
For astrophotography, the Rokinon 14mm has a clear advantage due to its wider aperture and manual focus. During a recent astrophotography workshop, I found the extra half-stop of light gathering ability made a noticeable difference in capturing star detail.
The Rokinon’s manual focus is actually an advantage for astrophotography, as it allows for precise focusing on stars without relying on the camera’s autofocus system, which can struggle in low-light conditions. I’ve found that using the Rokinon’s focus ring to achieve perfect focus on stars is more reliable than depending on autofocus.
The Tokina, while capable for astrophotography, requires more careful focusing and typically needs a higher ISO to achieve similar results. During a Milky Way shoot, I found the Tokina produced good results, but I needed to increase the ISO by about a stop compared to what I would have used with the Rokinon.
Also Read: Nikon D800 vs D750
Street Photography
For street photography, the Tokina’s autofocus gives it a significant advantage. During a street photography session in a busy city, I found the Tokina’s autofocus allowed me to quickly capture fleeting moments that would have been missed with manual focus.
The Tokina’s zoom range also proved useful for street photography, allowing me to adjust framing without drawing attention to myself by moving closer or farther from subjects. I could capture both environmental street scenes and more intimate moments by simply adjusting the zoom.
The Rokinon 14mm, while less suited to fast-paced street photography due to its manual focus, can still be used effectively for more deliberate street photography. During a street photography project focused on urban landscapes, I found the Rokinon’s excellent image quality and slightly wider aperture useful for capturing city scenes in various lighting conditions.
Who Should Choose Which Lens?
Choose the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II if:
- You value the versatility of a zoom range
- You need autofocus for your photography
- You shoot a variety of genres that require different focal lengths
- You primarily shoot landscapes, architecture, or travel photography
- You want a well-built lens with professional features
- You’re willing to pay more for autofocus and zoom capabilities
Choose the Rokinon 14mm f/2.4 if:
- You’re on a budget but still want quality ultra-wide performance
- You primarily shoot landscapes, astrophotography, or architecture
- You’re comfortable with manual focus
- You want the best possible optical quality for the price
- You value a slightly wider aperture for low-light situations
- You prefer a more intentional approach to composition
Pro Tips for Ultra-Wide Photography
After years of shooting with both lenses, I’ve learned a few techniques that can help you get the most out of either of these lenses:
- Use a tripod for critical work: Ultra-wide lenses magnify camera shake, so a tripod is essential for sharp images, particularly in low light. I’ve found that even with image stabilization (if your camera has it), a tripod still produces the sharpest results.
- Embrace foreground elements: Ultra-wide lenses can create images with a sense of depth by including prominent foreground elements. During landscape shoots, I always look for interesting foreground elements like rocks, flowers, or patterns to lead the viewer’s eye into the image.
- Watch your composition: Ultra-wide lenses include so much of the scene that it’s easy to include distracting elements. I’ve learned to scan the entire frame before taking the shot, paying particular attention to the edges and corners.
- Use small apertures for maximum depth of field: With ultra-wide lenses, you can achieve great depth of field even at relatively wide apertures, but for maximum sharpness from foreground to background, I typically shoot at f/8-f/11.
- Correct distortion in post-processing: Both lenses exhibit distortion that can be corrected in post-processing. I’ve found that using lens profiles in software like Lightroom or Photoshop can significantly improve the look of images, particularly for architectural photography.
- Experiment with perspectives: Ultra-wide lenses allow you to get close to subjects while still including the environment. During portrait sessions, I’ve experimented with getting very close to subjects to create dramatic, distorted perspectives that can be quite striking when used intentionally.
Also Read: Canon 5D vs Canon 6D
FAQ
Is the Tokina 11-16mm worth the extra cost over the Rokinon 14mm?
For photographers who need autofocus and the versatility of a zoom range, the Tokina is absolutely worth the additional cost. However, if you primarily shoot landscapes or astrophotography and are comfortable with manual focus, the Rokinon offers excellent value.
Can I use these lenses on full-frame cameras?
Both lenses are designed for APS-C cameras, but some can be used on full-frame cameras with limitations. The Tokina 11-16mm can be used on full-frame cameras at around 15-16mm without significant vignetting, while the Rokinon 14mm will have heavy vignetting on full-frame but can still produce usable images with some cropping.
Which lens is better for astrophotography?
The Rokinon 14mm is generally better for astrophotography due to its wider aperture (f/2.4 vs f/2.8) and manual focus, which allows for precise focusing on stars. The slightly wider aperture allows for more light gathering, which is crucial for capturing star detail.
Do I need special filters for these lenses?
Both lenses have front elements that protrude, making traditional screw-on filters incompatible. The Tokina 11-16mm accepts a special rear filter holder, while the Rokinon 14mm requires a special filter holder system that attaches to the front of the lens.
How do these lenses compare to newer ultra-wide lenses?
Both lenses have been on the market for several years, and newer options offer improvements in areas like autofocus, optical quality, and features like weather sealing. However, both the Tokina and Rokinon still offer excellent performance for their price, particularly for photographers on a budget.
Which lens is better for video?
The Tokina’s autofocus makes it more suitable for video work where focus adjustments are needed. However, both lenses can produce excellent video results when used with proper technique. The Rokinon’s manual focus can be advantageous for video when you want precise control over focus pulls.
Are these lenses weather-sealed?
The Tokina 11-16mm has some weather sealing but not to the extent of professional-grade lenses. The Rokinon 14mm has minimal weather sealing. For shooting in severe conditions, it’s best to protect both lenses from moisture and dust.
Which camera bodies work best with these lenses?
Both lenses work well with APS-C DSLR cameras from their respective manufacturers. The Tokina is available in Canon EF-S, Nikon F, and Sony A mounts, while the Rokinon is available in a wider range of mounts including Canon EF, Nikon F, Sony E, and others.
Conclusion
After extensive shooting with both the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Pro DX II and the Rokinon 14mm f/2.4, I can tell you that both are excellent lenses that serve different needs and budgets. The Tokina offers incredible versatility with its zoom range and autofocus capabilities, making it the perfect choice for photographers who need flexibility and want the convenience of autofocus. The Rokinon, while less versatile, delivers exceptional optical quality and value in a compact package, making it ideal for landscape and astrophotography enthusiasts who are comfortable with manual focus.
For my personal work, I find myself reaching for the Tokina when I’m shooting travel photography or situations where I need the flexibility of a zoom. The Rokinon becomes my choice when I’m shooting landscapes, astrophotography, or architectural work where optical quality and precise manual focus are paramount.
Ultimately, the decision comes down to your specific needs, shooting style, and budget. Whichever lens you choose, you’ll be getting a quality ultra-wide option that will expand your creative possibilities and allow you to capture the world from a unique perspective.
If you found this comparison helpful, be sure to bookmark this page for future reference. I’ll be updating it as I continue to test these lenses with new camera bodies and in different shooting scenarios. And don’t forget to check out my other articles on wide-angle photography and lens comparisons!
Which of these lenses would you choose for your photography? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!