Purpose of a fast UWA?

So I have the Tokina 11-16/2.8. Suggestions for taking advantage of the 2.8 aperture? I find myself trying to maximize the DoF. For most landscape shots I'm shooting at 8+. With indoor shots I also have a DoF problem, with areas seemingly looking oof, when its just the bokeh kicking in. So I rarely use 2.8 indoors as well..maybe I'm approaching it the wrong way?

Perhaps some examples would help?

Sadly I'm at work at the moment, so I can't upload anything. I guess the best way to sum up my question is, where would the Tokina have a large discernible advantage over a slower UWA, say the Canon 10-22?

low light is nice to have

You can still isolate details in the foreground shooting wide open with a WA or UWA lens...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #11916739
You can still isolate details in the foreground shooting wide open with a WA or UWA lens...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

5Dc + 17-40mm f/4L .. 1/40 @ f/4 ISO 100

Good example! The bokeh on the Tokina doesn't look anywhere as good though!

since tokina is faster, you can select lower iso and/or faster shutter speed, and still has the same exposure.
Lower iso, lower noise, faster speed, reduce chance of blur.
Not to mention tokina is fixed aperture, and a parfocal lens..
i prefer fixed aperture so i can zoom without worrying about exposure variation, and being a parfocal greatly help with my video.

Low light concerts.

Brennan.M wrote in post #11916734
low light is nice to have

That's the answer for me... and low light might be things like night time city views, landscape illuminated by moonlight, star trails.

I just got an 11-16 for astrophotography. The Tokina can be used in conjunction with a clip in light pollution filter and that can't be done with the Canon EF-S design (I even tried removing the back from the Canon!)

mansalim wrote in post #11916769
since tokina is faster, you can select lower iso and/or faster shutter speed, and still has the same exposure.
Lower iso, lower noise, faster speed, reduce chance of blur.
Not to mention tokina is fixed aperture, and a parfocal lens..
i prefer fixed aperture so i can zoom without worrying about exposure variation, and being a parfocal greatly help with my video.

Ah right, video! Good thinking.

Wouldn't a longer lens be a much better choice? Like a 85/1.8?

with the f/2.8 max aperture throughout the focal range, I see one of its advantages being that it allows those bodies with f/2.8 sensitive focus points the luxury of easier focussing.

Or is my assumption (based on limited experience admittedly) incorrect?

MintMark wrote in post #11916781
That's the answer for me... and low light might be things like night time city views, landscape illuminated by moonlight, star trails.

I just got an 11-16 for astrophotography. The Tokina can be used in conjunction with a clip in light pollution filter and that can't be done with the Canon EF-S design (I even tried removing the back from the Canon!)

So you shoot night time city landscapes at 2.8? The only advantage I can think of is that the exposure time is shorter, so less noise, but you're still better off shooting at 4+ for a sharper picture.

The light pollution filter idea is neat, it'll be nice to explore this one day.

UWAs have a hard time deciding on what to focus on in the first place. Most of the times I just shoot manual.

spineduke wrote in post #11916785
Wouldn't a longer lens be a much better choice? Like a 85/1.8?

Sure, but not every shot is a crop of the singer or performer. Sometimes you wanna get atmosphere, stage, audience or the entire band in one shot.

And most media photobooths for concerts are right in front of the stage, requiring wide lenses.

For example I shot this one a while back. If it was night time, I would have wished for the Tokina over my 10-22.

One word - Astrophotography.

When you're doing those wide-field Milky Way shots, or star-trails, then every single photon is precious. The extra stop or so can make a huge difference.

spineduke wrote in post #11916699
So I have the Tokina 11-16/2.8. Suggestions for taking advantage of the 2.8 aperture? I find myself trying to maximize the DoF. For most landscape shots I'm shooting at 8+.

Er, does it really make that much difference to the DoF? At 11mm and f/11 your hyperfocal distance is just 81 cm. Whereas at f/2.8 it's 226cm and everything from 184cm to infinity is in focus.

Now I don't think I'd really be that worried about such tiny differences in DoF.