I have had the 10-22. It is an excellent lens. I currently have the Canon 10-18. It is better optically than the 10-22, and it has IS. BUT, it 2/3 stop slower than the 10-22, and has a narrower range. I also have the Tokina 11-20 f/2.8. It is every bit as good as reviewers claim. Excellent sharpness wide open. It is large, and moderately heavy.
I've never had either of the Sigmas you list. If I were only going to have 1 UWA for apsc, I'd have to decide:
1.) Is video important? If yes, get the 10-18.
2.) Is aperture important? If yes, get the 11-20.
I think the only reason to buy the 10-22 is the more useful focal length range. It is more expensive than the others. It is slower than the Tokina. It doesn't have IS.
I bought the 10-18 for video, and the Tokina for aperture. I am happy owing both of them.