Help Me Decide,Between Canon EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 or Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, or another suggestion; Vote & comment if you'd like
| POLL: "Ultra Wide, Crop Lens" |
 Canon EF-S 10-22mm f.3.5-4.5 USM | 58 43% |
| Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 ATX | 66 48.9% |
| Other (Please Reply with Other Suggestion) | 11 8.1% |
Munky Senior Member  504 posts Joined Jul 2010 Location: Minneapolis More info | Feb 20, 2011 22:16 | #1 Help Me Decide,Between Canon EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 or Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, or another suggestion; Vote & comment if you'd like I haven't been active on POTN lately so I'm not on the Feedback System,But I have Feedback dating back 10 years here,as well as on Fred Miranda (I'm most active there).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tjbrock42 Senior Member 944 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jan 2010 Location: Indiana More info | Feb 20, 2011 22:28 | #2 I voted for the Tokina. With all of those fast lenses in your sig, you will miss 2.8 more than you will like 17-22mm. Besides, you have the 17-55 to cover this focal length range. 6D
LOG IN TO REPLY |
themadman Cream of the Crop  18,871 posts Likes: 14 Joined Nov 2009 Location: Northern California More info | Feb 20, 2011 22:31 | #3 Unless you really want f2.8, I would go with the Sigma 10-20 f4.5-5.6 Will | WilliamLiuPhotography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 20, 2011 22:37 | #4 tjbrock42 wrote in post #11882311  I voted for the Tokina. With all of those fast lenses in your sig, you will miss 2.8 more than you will like 17-22mm. Besides, you have the 17-55 to cover this focal length range. Save yourself some money and get the faster lens. Thanks for your vote & reply; I'm thinking the same thing but i Dunno why i'm having doubts... I haven't been active on POTN lately so I'm not on the Feedback System,But I have Feedback dating back 10 years here,as well as on Fred Miranda (I'm most active there).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 20, 2011 22:38 | #5 themadman wrote in post #11882323 Unless you really want f2.8, I would go with the Sigma 10-20 f4.5-5.6 Thats a bit to 'slow' for me; But I Appreciate your reply; Thank you! I haven't been active on POTN lately so I'm not on the Feedback System,But I have Feedback dating back 10 years here,as well as on Fred Miranda (I'm most active there).
LOG IN TO REPLY |
themadman Cream of the Crop 18,871 posts Likes: 14 Joined Nov 2009 Location: Northern California More info | Feb 20, 2011 22:57 | #6 Oops, it is a 10-20 f4-5.6, I misspoke =P Will | WilliamLiuPhotography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Terran Member 151 posts Joined Nov 2010 Location: Orange County, CA More info | Feb 21, 2011 00:13 | #7 I love my 11-16 and it's constant 2.8 aperture. These lenses are hard to find in stock, I had to wait six months before one came in. | 7D | Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 | 17-55 f/2.8 | 24 f/1.4L II | 60 f/2.8 Macro | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II | EF 2X II | 430EX II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
TheRisingArms Senior Member 351 posts Joined Feb 2011 Location: Sydney, Australia More info | Feb 21, 2011 00:21 | #8 +1 for Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 Bodies: Canon 500D | Canon EOS M
LOG IN TO REPLY |
theCOkid Senior Member 268 posts Joined Jan 2010 Location: Portland, OR More info | Another happy Tokina user. I'd rather have the 2.8 aperture than the wider range - I just figure if I'm putting on a UWA, I'm doing it to shoot wide. If I need anything above 16mm, I'm happy to change to another lens. IQ is also very solid. --Ty--
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nyy Senior Member 616 posts Joined May 2006 Location: New Jersey More info | Feb 21, 2011 00:23 | #10 There is a Sigma 10-20 with constant f3.5 now. "I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside." --Mitch Hedberg
LOG IN TO REPLY |
les_au Senior Member  More info | Feb 21, 2011 00:31 | #11 the tokina 11-16 f/2.8 was my choice, but each to their own, i like the idea of being able to use the lens's low light capabilities
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Feb 21, 2011 05:30 | #12 I own both the Canon and Tokina UWAs. Which is best depends on which conditions you'll be shooting in. For anything outdoors in the sunshine then the Canon's supreme flare-resistance makes it the lens of choice. For interior shooting or for astronomy wide-fields then the f2.8 of the Tokina is the deciding factor. Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JoeSiR Mostly Lurking 10 posts Joined Dec 2010 Location: Montreal More info | Feb 21, 2011 06:07 | #13 Why not a Sigma 8-16! Canon T2i (550D), Canon 15-85, Sigma 30 1.4, LR3
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ottacat Member 171 posts Joined Dec 2010 Location: Ottawa, Ontario More info | Feb 21, 2011 06:37 | #14 I've been looking at the same decision. I will be using mine for landscape photography in good light where I want extended DOF thus the 2.8 is not really an issue for me so I'll be getting the 10-22 Canon. I also like its 77mm diameter will allow me to use the ND density filters I have for my 17-55mm. 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF-S 17-55, EF 70-200L IS II, EF 100 macro, 1.4 TC III, 430 EX II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DStanic Cream of the Crop 6,148 posts Likes: 7 Joined Oct 2007 Location: Canada More info | Feb 21, 2011 07:17 | #15 On the wide end, every mm counts. i had the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 and didn't find it "slow", because at such a short FL you can hold it much steadier. Even though I was getting slow shutter speeds with it, I was able to get similar results in low light as with my Sigma 24-60 f/2.8. Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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! |
| ||
| Latest registered member is michallispl 1223 guests, 339 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
