UWA for 7D

<p>Hi folks<br>

I traded my old sigma 10-20 towards a 12-24 last year, in anticipation of going full frame. Then Canon launched the 7D, which I got. The 12-24 is a decent enough performer on the 7D but I was missing the extreme edge of the UWA, and since I got a ND110, missed the 77mm thread.<br>

I'm in the process of selling the 12-24 and was about to happily get another 10-20 (not the the f3.5 one, it's got a 82mm thread) but then considered my options...<br>

In an ideal world I would stick to on-brand, wheras Canon don't do a comparable optic to the 12-24 for full frame, there is obviously the 10-22 for 7D's.<br>

I couldn't run to this lens new, but having done a little research, I've seen the Tokina 11-16.<br>

According to the tests its got amazing resolution but suffers a little from CA's.<br>

I'm interested in real-life users views, has this been a problem for you in practise? Is it easily fixed in ACR?<br>

How have you got on with filters? Do polarisers vignette?<br>

I would probably use the lens from f4 to f11. Is there any real performance over the Canon?<br>

I have a 17-40 (which I'm going to keep) to cover 17mm up, so reduced focal range of tokina isn't necessarily a huge problem.<br>

So my stipulations are:<br>

UWA<br>

77mm thread<br>

Canon or Tokina or....</p>

<p>Sorry to be picky but:<br>

Yes, I have already checked out the usual review sites such as photozone.de etc. And I've done some forum searches, including on here.<br>

PLEASE ONLY answer if you have experience of both lenses, ideally on a 7D. Experience as in using, as in putting through ACR, as in mounting filters, as in you get the idea...</p>

<p>I've briefly tried both Canon 10-22 and Tokina 11-16 on a 450D more than a year ago, and I went with the Tokina. I just upgraded to a 7D a few weeks ago. So I am using Tokina 11-16 on the 7D but I never tried Canon 10-22 on it.</p>

<p>For me Tokina's speed was a major factor, because I use it indoor most of the times, often with poor light. I guess it doesn't matter if you use it for landscapes instead. CA hasn't be an issue for me, but I can tell for sure Tokina's lens is more prone to flares than Canon's one (I have seen the same on Tokina 16-50 too).</p>

<p>Tokina's superior build quality is nice, but not that much of a critical factor, not for me at least. As for image quality, I like both lens. I can't comment on filters because I haven't use any on it, sorry.</p>

<p>Hope it will help<br>

Massimo</p>

<p>I don't have any recommendation except that I have been very pleased with my Sigma 10-20mm (old version). Just used it last night again to do fireworks (ours are fairly low flying and closeup with a wide angle is usually better). The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is by all accounts a fine lens, but if you've been happy with Sigma so far, why not stay with them? You'll save a buck or two, and tests of the 10-20 show it to have its own virtues.<br>

I also have the predecessor of the 12-24mm, the Sigma 15-30mm for the 35mm sensor (I missed the ultrawide angle on the full frame). I think it's great as well.</p>

<p>I think you may illustrate the problem with buying lenses based on what direction you <em>might</em> go in the future. On the other hand, with both a 10-20 and a 15-30, I guess I illustrate the problem with not looking forward to what might be.</p>

<p>I have a 7D and a S10-20/4-5.6. I'm happy with the lens. However if I were to do it all over again I'd probably go Canon 10-22, reason being better colors. Not enough reason for me to switch at this point though, but a consideration nonetheless.</p>

<p>Also, if I were to start again I'd take a serious look at Sigma 8-16/4-5.6. I love 10 mm and there are times when wider would be better. This lens lets you do just that. Yes it does have the bulging front element, but this gives advantages in terms of performance.</p>

<p>Tokina 11-16 looks good on paper. I have a Tokina 10-17 fisheye that I enjoy. It's sharp and produces crisp and contrasty photos, but the abberations drive me mad at times. Remember with ultrawide you're more likely to be dealing with a variety of lighting conditions within the frame, which gives more opportunity for fringing to creep in. Just a thought.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>10mm is about 10% wider than 11mm, and 11mm is about 10% wider than 12mm. (assuming they are not lying about their actual focal length) 10% at the wide end of things makes a significant difference. I replaced my Tokina 12-24 for the Canon 10-22 for the same reason you are planning to; it's not wide enough. Why only go half way?</p>

<p>And to quote Arie's good advice, "Also, if I were to start again I'd take a serious look at Sigma 8-16/4-5.6."</p>

<p>Why not go for the new Sigma 8-16mm, it gives you the view the Sigma 12-24 does on my 5DII. http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/8-16mm-f45-56-dc-hsm-sigma<br>

<img src="http://www.sigmaphoto.com/client/images/products/203_8-16mm_f45-56_DC_HSM.png" alt="" width="460" height="460" /></p>

<p>Cheers all, had considered the 8-16, but it's partly a filtering issue, my other main lenses are 77mm, and so I've got a ND110 77mm filter which I want to use on the UWA, as well as ND grads, which rules that particular lens out.<br>

I could buy a new copy of the sigma outright, put some extra towards a used canon 10-22, or put a little more towards the tokina, the faster aperture and the reported sharpness of the tokina is appealling, but then there's always other avenues for the money, I liked the 10-20 on my XTi, I guess I'm just concerned that with double the pixels, the lens may not be as impressive on the 7D.<br>

Thanks again.</p>

<p>I don't think that we are yet to the point where the sensor resolution makes decent lenses too "low res" for <em>practical</em> use. I <em>am</em> sure that 100% pixel peeping of a 20MP image with any lens will <strong>not</strong> show extreme sharpness with your nose 20cm or so from the screen display or on a 1 meter by one-and-a-half meter print.<br>

You don't get that sort of sharpness even with an 8MP image, as newbies complaining about how "soft" their lenses are frequently complain.</p>

<p>Thanks JDM, not a newbie, just I haven't used every single lens out there, don't intend to pixel peep, but do want the sharpest lens for the cash, most tests rate the tokina highly in this regard but then the vast majority of my shots aren't of resolution charts. Was really hoping for some real life experience with the various UWAs. The 10-20 was great on my XTi, the 7D is a different beast, does it make sense to look an alternative lens? That's all.</p>