Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 v. Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 v. Tokina 11-16 f/2.8

[keith_anderson7]

I have a sigma 10-20mm for my 350D. A somewhat tangential remark is that I'm

going to go for a 40D or an XSi body soon.

 

I love the 10-20mm for outdoor shooting. However, as the slowest glass of the

lot, it's got limitations for indoor shooting without studio lighting. I was

jazzed about the Tokina 11-16 for a similar focal range, but with faster glass.

I'm guessing the Tokina also has a slightly better build quality. I'm not sure

if it's worth selling my Sigma 10-20 and trade for the Tokina 11-16. Along

those lines, I should also probably think about the Canon 10-22 as it's faster

than the Sigma, probably also a better build quality, but has the best focal range.

 

I realize that lens selection is a personal choice and I'm not asking which one

is "better." But I'd appreciate any input on the matter as the Tokina seems (at

first glance) as a worthy upgrade for super wide shots indoors and maybe a

lateral trade (no advantage/disadvantage) for the outdoor stuff (I don't use the

20mm as much as I use the 10mm on the Sigma I have now). Thoughts?

 

Also, if anyone has the Canon version I wonder if they felt it was worth the

extra money. I personally think the Sigma 10-20 is the best Sigma lens I've

ever used, certainly their lineup has some dogs as well as some gems.

 

Thanks for any input.

[milton-chris]

I use the 10-20 on my 40D for real estate shots - sometimes use my 580 flash and sometimes no flash. When using flash, I shoot S jpegs; no flash and I shoot RAW and fix as needed.

 

For my use, I find that I am adjusting the shadows/highlights on almost every shot regardless of whether I am using flash or not - don't know if that has to do with the lens or not.

 

I use it at 10mm almost all the time.

 

HTH somewhat.

[keith_anderson7]

Chris,

 

Thanks for the feedback. I certainly notice that shooting indoors with a flash on my 10-20mm usually yields bad results. Usually the center is exposed well, the edges are very dark. Presumably the flash can't fill the entire image area since the AOV is so large.

 

I haven't noticed that when shooting outdoors in daylight or early evening where there is ample light.

 

I was hoping the Tokina would be slightly better since the glass is faster. Although the lens itself will not have any effect on lighting (center v edge) however I'm wondering if it's less relevant since there would be less reason to shoot with a flash. Also I could play with the metering with perhaps more latitude with a faster lens?

[samoksner]

Having used the tokina, i can say that's it's a great lens, it's fast, feels good and performs great. After selling the sigma, you'll probably only have to chip in $100 bucks or so for the tokina. The limited range isn't a problem for me, I want to use it at the wide it (which is why we buy these lens'). The tokina is perfectly usable at f2.8, i just printed an 11*18 from it yesterday, it looks great. The last couple of millimeters are a tad soft, but way sharper then the sigma or the canon in those extreme corners. Go for the tokina, i'm not sure where they have it in stock, it comes and goes... adorama is only taking orders, B&H had a batch but they all sold out, you might want to check them again though.

[chris.sager]

Unless someone finds some sort of glaring problem with the lens, it seems like a no brainer to me. I've been hoping someone would release an affordable rectilinear super wide prime for APS-C EOS cameras and it looks like this lens will fit the bill. Its a zoom after all, but at 11mm seems to perform better than almost any other lens out there. I dont think there is any other lens that can be purchased for $600 on EOS that provides 11mm and f2.8 either.

 

From the Nikon reviews I've seen it even may be possible to use this lens at 16mm on Full Frame, something i am anxious to hear about on the Canon side of things or to try for myself. It becomes a pretty incredible value if you look at it as a 11mm crop sensor prime with f2.8 and a 16mm full frame prime at f2.8.

[gerrymorgan]

<p>

I regularly use both the Canon 10-22 and the Sigma 10-20. I consider them to be equal, apart from the <b>slightly</b> longer reach of the Canon. I hardly notice that the Canon is slightly faster. When I compared them at 100%, I thought the Canon was <b>very slightly</b> sharper — almost imperceptibly so. I definitely would not bother "upgrading" from the Sigma to the Canon. They are both great lenses.

</p>

<p>

I have no experience with the Tokina but, as you use mostly the wide end of the Sigma and take photos indoors, perhaps you could live with its shorter reach and would benefit from its wider aperture.

</p>

<p>

You mentioned that you are getting dark edges indoors with your flash. Have you considered getting more creative with your lighting? Are you bouncing it off a bright surface such as the ceiling? If not, that will give you better light coverage. Or perhaps you could try a couple of off-camera flashes, triggered remotely and strategically placed. If I were you, I'd be looking at better lighting for indoor shots before buying a different lens.

</p>