Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 14 Apr 2012 (Saturday) 14:39
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

tokina 11-16 vs. canon 10-22

 
dandai
Senior Member
Avatar
317 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Newport News
     
Apr 14, 2012 14:39 |  #1

I'm about to buy a WA zoom. It's between the tokina 11-16 and the canon 10-22. I'd appreciate hearing from owners of both lens about the good and bad of each. I like the speed of the tokina,but I know Canon quality. One I don't like is the way canon charges L series prices for the EF-s lens,without L series build quality.
So any comments will be appreciated.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Apr 14, 2012 14:54 |  #2

In general, the 11-16 has better IQ, and it cost less.
But, the 11-16 is more prudent to flare.
And on the other hand, the tokina is 2.8, which helps a lot in low light places, while the canon will struggle a bit without having to increase the iso pretty high.

I used to have the 11-16, and it was an amazing lens.


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,256 posts
Likes: 86
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:16 |  #3

Sorry, I don't have either one, though I tested them when I bought my 12-24 Tokina.

IMO, in some respects the Canon is the best of the UWA. It's very resistant to flare, which is always somewhat of a concern with really wide lenses. The 10-22 handles flare unusually well. Yes, it's a little plasticky. But no EF-S lens will ever be an L-series anyway, since part of Canon's definition of an "L" is that it must be fully compatible with all EOS cameras and EF-S lenses are only usable on croppers from the 20D/Digital Rebel onward. And, IQ is my main criteria anyway (some of my other non-L Canon lenses are a little plasticky, but take great pics and have proven to be plenty durable). On the other hand, the 10-22 is also about the most expensive of the UWA options. (If it were an L, it would be even more expensive, I'm sure!) For the money they charge, Canon should throw in a lens hood at least. But they don't... so figure on a little more $ for that, too. All the other UWA options include a lens hood. Figure on about $890 for 10-22 and hood.

The Tokina 11-16 is plenty sharp and quite well made. It is more confidence inspiring, though the build may or may not actually make it more durable. I doubt it's any better sealed.. It doesn't offer USM, but in one respect that doesn't matter because even a micro motor gives almost instant focus when the focusing group of the lens only needs to move a very short distance to achieve focus. Not having USM, you don't get Full Time Manual Focus (FTM). That only matters if you manual focus a lot. With the Tokina and other non-USM lenses, you have to shift or switch the lens to manual focus before you can manually focus.

How much do you really need f2.8 on an UWA lens? You "pay a price" for f2.8... This lens is probably the most prone to flare and certainly the narrowest range of focal lengths, of any of the UWA options. It's also about $100 more than the Toki 12-24, though it's still considerably less than the Canon... about $700. I simply could justify the trade-off to get the larger apertures, don't see myself needing f2.8 on an UWA, am usually stopping this type of lens down rather than using it wide open. Someone shooting in low light a lot might want f2.8, though.

I found the Tokina 12-24/4 a nice compromise. IQ close to the same as the Canon and the 11-16, same build as the other Toki, wider range of focal lengths, 12mm is wide enough for me though it's noticeable difference with 10mm or even 8mm. Flare resistance I found good... second only to the Canon. I also like the constant aperture (and f4 is fast enuf for me). A variable aperture can be a pain if using manual flash or studio strobes, which I sometimes do (though not a whole lot with an UWA lens). Finally, I also found the price nice... a few years ago it was a bit cheaper than the $600 it's selling for now.

There is also the Tamron 10-24mm... It wasn't available when I was shopping, so I didn't get to compare it. It's the widest range of focal lengths in an UWA, and one of the cheaper usually under $500. I have heard it's a little soft at the 24mm end of the zoom, but check for yourself since I'm just passing along what I've heard.

I was able to compare another less expensive model, the Sigma 10-20 with variable aperture. It currently is right around $500 too. It was pretty good, but I didn't feel it handled flare nearly as well as the Tokina 12-24 and Canon. However, there is a newer version of this lens now, which might be improved.

There are actually three other Sigma options: 8-16mm, 10-20/3.5 and 12-24mm. I have not used any of these. The 8-16mm is the newest and the widest lens available, without going to the extremes of a fisheye. It does have pretty strong wide angle distortions, but that's not surprising. The 10-20/3.5 is also relatively new... it is the only other constant aperture UWA, besides the two Tokina. It also has HSM focus, which is Sigma's version of USM (so I suspect it would allow for FTM). It's a bit pricier but not the priciest, at $650. The 12-24mm is actually a full frame compatible lens, so is quite a bit pricier at $830 and somewhat wasted on a crop camera, but might interest someone using both formats. It also has fairly strong wide angle distortions, but that's not suprising in the widest lens on the market for a full frame camera. Currently it's a second version of this lens selling, but I don't know the details of how it was revised or what might have been improved.

Hope this helps... have fun shopping!


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:32 |  #4

For outdoor work other than astrophotography, canon over tokina because of the flare resistance. For indoor work or astrophotography, tokina.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Apr 14, 2012 20:34 |  #5

I think people make too much of the flare issue. It is prone to flare, but I generally found it simple enough to compensate when necessary by shading the lens with my hat or hand.

I've used both and prefer the Tokina since it is cheaper, faster, and better built with slightly better IQ. But if you need the extra zoom range or the flare resistance the Canon is the better choice. It's hard to go wrong either way.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
z0diac
Member
64 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Apr 14, 2012 21:00 |  #6

dandai wrote in post #14265509 (external link)
I'm about to buy a WA zoom. It's between the tokina 11-16 and the canon 10-22. I'd appreciate hearing from owners of both lens about the good and bad of each. I like the speed of the tokina,but I know Canon quality. One I don't like is the way canon charges L series prices for the EF-s lens,without L series build quality.
So any comments will be appreciated.

I just did the tossup you're doing. For me it was between the Sigma 10-20mm or the Canon 10-22mm. I opted for the Canon. I did lots of research and viewed lots of full crop tests, watched lots of YouTube vids, etc, etc.. I probably SHOULD have gone with the Sigma as it's 2/3rd the price of the Canon, but I figure, if I'm going to spend that much, why not bite the bullet a bit harder and have piece of mind with the Canon.


Canon T2i / 70-200 2.8 IS II / 10-22mm / 50mm 1.8 / 18-200mm / 18-55mm / 55-250mm / 1.4x extender / filters / tripod / monopod / lightning trigger / Nikon Coolpix P90

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
evil3
Member
61 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Canada
     
Apr 14, 2012 22:45 |  #7

A plus of the tokina is that it can also be used (15mm to 16mm) on FF without any modification to the lens.


My Flickr (external link)
5D MKII & III | EF20-35 f3.5-4.5 | EF70-200 f2.8II | Sigma 50 A | EF85 f1.8 | Voigtlander 40mm | EF28 f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Apr 15, 2012 06:51 |  #8

Sirrith wrote in post #14265731 (external link)
For outdoor work other than astrophotography, canon over tokina because of the flare resistance. For indoor work or astrophotography, tokina.

Simple and 100% correct.

I own both of these lenses and they're used exactly as Sirrith recommends. The Tokina is a real pig for flare. Yes, you can avoid it. By making sure you only ever shoot outside on gloomy overcast days; or, if it's sunny, then keep the sun behind you. Which is very restricting with an UWA. Even doing wide-field astro stuff you've got to watch out for flare from the Moon!

However, get into a situation where f2.8 is useful (and that's not outside in daylight) and the Tokina is excellent.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
irwaffles
Member
Avatar
161 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Bay Area California
     
Apr 15, 2012 12:53 |  #9

I shoot a lot indoors, so for the 2.8 alone I chose Tokina, it's an amazing lens at social gatherings (which is mostly when I bring around my camera)!


flickr (external link)
5d mark 2 - Canon 24-70 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scapevision
Goldmember
1,118 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Toronto
     
Apr 15, 2012 13:47 |  #10

a friend of mine has both. He tested them out side-by-side and as noted, the tokina is way sharper, but prone to flare more than canon. Canon is more usable in well lit places, tokina is better for overall landscape work. I've had the tokina myself and "rented" the canon for a couple days. I went with tokina simply because canon was nowhere near "sharp", but that's subjective. What is objective - tokina has better resolution overall, build quality is tank-like, operation is very smooth. The range is a bit limiting though. I would wait out for the new version of the tokina


scapevision.carbonmade​.com (external link) and on Flickr (external link)
"Amateurs worry about equipment, professionals worry about money, masters worry about light. I just take pictures"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2Live4
Senior Member
Avatar
671 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
     
Apr 15, 2012 13:50 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

I had both on Canon 40D. I bought the Tokina first, and loved it. But then I decided to get the 10-22 for more range, and it performed flawlessly.

Tokina has better build, and much heavier than 10-22. Like others mentioned, do you need the f/2.8 for your shooting style? 10-22 will give you more range if you don't need f/2.8, and better choice to go with your 24-105L lens.


~Khánh - an amateur bOkeh-OLic
5D III & Some L's
Feedback | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dandai
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
317 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Newport News
     
Apr 15, 2012 13:51 as a reply to  @ irwaffles's post |  #12

Thanks for all the input guys,I just went ahead and ordered the Tokina.The flare problem seems to bother some people and others say it isn't that bad.Guess I'll find out..Perhaps some copies are worse than others




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2Live4
Senior Member
Avatar
671 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
     
Apr 15, 2012 13:55 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

Flare is not a "bad" thing, it gives another dimension in the pictures. If you care about the flare, then you can get a UV filter, which helps a bit. Regardless, you'll love the Tokina! Enjoy! :)


~Khánh - an amateur bOkeh-OLic
5D III & Some L's
Feedback | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dandai
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
317 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Newport News
     
Apr 15, 2012 13:59 as a reply to  @ 2Live4's post |  #14

Yeah,now that I ordered the Tokina,I need to get a nice macro lens,then a flash, then a..... cha ching!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Apr 15, 2012 14:36 |  #15

2Live4 wrote in post #14270077 (external link)
Flare is not a "bad" thing, it gives another dimension in the pictures. If you care about the flare, then you can get a UV filter, which helps a bit.

You are joking?


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

60,609 views & 0 likes for this thread
tokina 11-16 vs. canon 10-22
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
824 guests, 183 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.