AT-X Pro DX 11-16mm F/2.8 Asph for Sony/ Minolta

Disclaimer : i've only been shooting with a dslr for just over a year. I'm still learning and teaching myself. In NO shape or form would i classify myself as someone with a professional level of understanding photography, BUT i'm better then your avg person.. ;)With anything, you can find a reason to pick at it, and for this lens, with some of the quarks, i feel that most people give it a better rating simply because there isn't a single option out for the Sony Mount with these specs. Sure you can have the focus distance wider on a Sigma model but it aint gonna be a f/2.8 lens.The other thing interesting about this lens is that on my a77 model, even if i put the lens in manual mode, the camera continues to use autofocus mode. To fully engage manual focus, i have to use the focus knob on the camera body (lower left of the lens mount). Its not a terrible thing, just another "quark"I'm wonder now if i should have went with one of the variable lenses offered by Sigma because i don't find myself being inlove with alot of the f/2.8 photo's i've been taking with my a77. (i'm actually wondering if i'm having a mechanical issue with this lens, like the auto focus not being calibrated correctly).With all my unsures, what i do know is that having an option wider than 16mm is SWEET! Normally i shoot with the Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 but found that indoors it just wasn't good enough, more so infact that the a77 is a cropped sensor. The lens itself feels solid and sturdy.Closing out, the only reason why i wouldn't recommend this lens is because NOW (announced 2 months after i bought this) they made the Version 2 of this lens for the Sony Mount. Version 2 has been out for a while but only for Canon & Nikon. Today you can order the Tokina AT-X116 Pro DX II for almost the same price! There is little change to the ProII so unless you can get the ProI, NEW, at a heavily discounted price, go by the ProII.

For the money this is the best super wide out there. Do not waste your money on Sony's effort, this is better, faster, less costly, better made.I got retired my Tamron 10-25 for this lens and could not be happier. With my Ziess 25-75 I've got most of my bases covered, except macro work, which is covered by the 50mm. This is a hefty little monster which feels solid in the hands. The photos do not do justice to the ribbing on the controls, which are are also hefty, chunky and a bit old school, but in a good way. The controls are muted, in a rubbery flat black and provide a good grip.There are some small niggles that you do have to live with. The lens, because of that fast 2.8 aperture is not a easy to store cylinder, it's more of a cone. It has to be thoughtfully slipped into a bag bottom first. It is also nose heavy, which may make things interesting when manually focusing the lens or taking the lens off / placing the lens on the body.Forget stacking ND Filters on this lens, or anything other than a thin UV or thin polarizer, that 11mm sweep means one filter in front of the lens period. The 11mm sweep is a little much in most cases, even in a crop sensor, you will find yourself working at the 16mm end most of the time. Still at 11mm, the vignetting is under control and the distortion is correctable in post. Color is good and stopped down to an 8 the lens is plenty sharp.At this price point you are looking at Sigma or Tamron as alternative to the Sony supplied unit. I've used the Tamron. It's is not a bad lens, but it quickly got on my nerves. That full stop of difference, the f 4 to the 2.8 of the Tonkina got annoying quickly. And there is some serious weirdness with the Tamron's distortion, it gets all wavy and wonky and not correctable with the Tamron. The Tamron face-plants in so many different ways it just begins to get fustrating. Holding the Tamron your hand after holding the Tonkina the Tamron just screams "cheep" The grippy rubber of the Tonkina is replaced by the plastic of the Tamron. Despite the Tamron being the more modern design and effort, the Tonkina still feels more solid, if a bit dated.I can not speak to how the Tonkina measures up to the Sigma, but I can read reviews. This is why I bought the Tamron in the first place, it did score better than the Sigma, by a large margin. I will say that having used both lenses the Tonkina is heads and shoulders above the Tamron.I'm not really missing the gap between 25mm to 16mm. As 16mm in a crop works out as a 24 in full frame, I can see why this works. 25mm is like 35mm so dropping down to 24mm is no big deal, something I used to do without blinking back in the day when I popped on a 28mm. A 24mm actually works a lot better for me than the old-school 28mm. And I do love keeping the 2.8 aperture. That is important in a Sony because you really are fighting for every last photon, every last bit of light. That translucent mirror is wonderful, but it does cost you a third of a stop. And let's be real Sony DSLR cameras do get noisier quicker than the big two, cranking up the ISO has to be done with caution. Thus slow lenses are your bane. A super wide that graces you with a full stop of extra light is a true gift. And when that gift comes at a steal, plus is better than the offering from Sony, your purchase decision is made for you.

I ended up returning this. Maybe it's just the nature of a super wide angle lens, but I just could not get a clear picture with my A77. The camera had a really hard time with auto-focus. I tried manually focusing, but just could not get a sharp image. Maybe not an issue if you're shooting big landscapes, but I just decided it wasn't worth the money for me for 5mm more width than I get with the 16-50 that came with my camera. Build quality seemed good. Not as big or heavy as I was lead to believe by some reviews. If you do a lot of outside scenery, might work for you.

I am disappointed in focus ring, unable to get mine to lock in manual focus which is a must for astrophotography. I am using a Sony A77. Other than that critical fault, lens seems okay, sharp, easy to use, good color rendition.