tokina at-x 35-200 3.5/4.5 for olympus OM

[peters8]

Hi guy! do you know this zoom? is it a bad lens?thanks

[EKDobbs]

Pretty much any variable aperture zoom (especially one of such a large range) is going to have worse performance than a prime of the same focal length. However, the construction of any zoom lens varies, so "bad" is completely subjective. It will likely be up to par for 35mm 8x10 prints if you don't shoot it at f/4 or below. Shooting it at f/8 will give you reasonably good performance, provided the lens is not malfunctioning.

[peters8]

Thanks!
I could buy an Erno 75-200 4.5 macro.
What do you think,is it better than the tokina?

[EKDobbs]

As a rule of thumb, the larger a range that the lens covers, the more flare/softness/errors you will find in the photos. IMHO, the 75-200 aught to be better on principle, but it really depends on the construction of the lens and the quality of your particular copy. Also, variable apertures (3.5-5.6, etc.) tend to indicate a cheaper/lower quality lens, but not always. A fixed aperture (70-200 2.8) requires the aperture to change as the lens is zoomed, which makes it more expensive, and likely higher quality.

I can't speak to these particular lenses or to what your preference for quality is. The lens on your camera is only one of many things that will determine how your photograph will print. You can shoot a leica onto Pan-F, develop in Microdol, and print onto Ilford Art 300 FB, but if your enlarger lens is a magnifying glass duck-taped to a corrective lens, nobody will care about the rest.