Canon 10-22, Sigma 8-16mm or Tokina 11-16

Thanks
Where are you getting your lens prices from out of interest?
Digitalrev is selling the sigma for 360 quid shipped via DHL express, for 5 pounds over the tamron, definitely worth it IMO :
http://www.digitalrev.​com …3%2C4%2C5%2C6%2​C7%2C8%2C9

I looked at them and chose the Canon. I couldn't see any difference in picture quality in the store when I was trying them out (all I had to review them was the LCD on the camera). I looked around and concluded the Canon sells fast and easy in the used marketplace, and generally for a good price. All my glass is Canon for this reason, it would take something exceptional to get me to change brands and so far I haven't found anything exceptional.

Well having (at last read the link Sirrith supplied) I think its down to these two:

£595 - Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM Lens
£460 - Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM Lens

Quite a price difference, the Sigma also keeps its 3.5 through the range which may be handy indoors.

But on this reviewits not looking so hot at 100% crops.

The prices are from Camera Price Buster which compares UK prices.

DigitalRev as HK based (I got my 7D fro them and had all sorts of fun, but thats a discussion for another thread ), which also has issue with warranties, especially on Sigma lenses where Sigma have gone very grouchy about imports.

Just spotted your post in there rick_reno - that is very true, I just sold my 70-200 for pretty much what I got it for and the best price I've seen 2nd hand for the 10-22 over here is £540, so hardy worth getting at that price difference.

I chose the Canon for its flare resistance and overall contrast, but I recently gave the new Sigma 8-16mm a try and was very impressed, mainly by its sharpness despite being so extremely wide at the wide end. I'm put off swapping mainly because I don't like how the Sigma zoom ring turns the opposite direction from all my Canon zooms.

Arg, now I'm seeing some nice Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM shots...

Oh this is getting silly

I also heard that the Sigma 4.5 is sharper than the newer 3.5 - can anyone confirm this?

John_N wrote in post #12213458
Arg, now I'm seeing some nice Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM shots...

Oh this is getting silly

I also heard that the Sigma 4.5 is sharper than the newer 3.5 - can anyone confirm this?

Copy variation imho. There's so many conflicting reports, heh. Lenstip vs thedigitalpicture crops, etc. I'd get the cheaper one, though.

In my opinion it comes down to.
1. want f2.8? Get Tokina.
2. Want best flare resistance and most useful general zoom range? Get Canon.
3. On a budget? Get the slower Sigma 10-20
4. Want really wide while still great sharpness? Sigma 8-16mm.

Can't go wrong with any!

woos wrote in post #12213933
Copy variation imho. There's so many conflicting reports, heh. Lenstip vs thedigitalpicture crops, etc. I'd get the cheaper one, though.

In my opinion it comes down to.
1. want f2.8? Get Tokina.
2. Want best flare resistance and most useful general zoom range? Get Canon.
3. On a budget? Get the slower Sigma 10-20
4. Want really wide while still great sharpness? Sigma 8-16mm.

Can't go wrong with any!

i went with #1 though. i love the 2.8 and it's also good to have just in case. also from the pics from the sample threads, tokina was my favorite one. i was going to go with sigma since it was cheap and comparable to canon but went with tokina since i found one available.

also if you think canon has better resale than sigma 10-20 you are wrong. at least in american prices, sigma is 479 and used sells for ~400 while canon is 800+ now and sells for ~650.

The Tokina flares pretty bad but only in certain circumstances. It hasn't been a problem to me at all...
See this shot, the flares near the reflection of the tower. Takes no more than 2 minutes to fix in post...

Well I got myself a Sigma 10-20mm (old version) for just under £290 - thank you all for your help

John_N wrote in post #12213458
Arg, now I'm seeing some nice Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM shots...

Oh this is getting silly

I also heard that the Sigma 4.5 is sharper than the newer 3.5 - can anyone confirm this?

Yes I can. The 10-20 f3.5 copyy I had did not get sharp until f5.6 or f8 at 10mm. The 10-20 f4-5.6 copy i have is sharp at f4. I have read several posts on this forum where the vast majority of people trying the sigma 10-20 f3.5 had the exact same experience.

lol, knowing my luck you;d have said the exact opposite

Thanks again, always nice to get confirmation.

The one serious issue that puts me off buying the Sigma 8-16mm over the Canon 10-22mm is the lack of a threaded end on the Sigma for attaching filters.

This lens is primarily a landscape lens and filters will be critical for most shooting instances to get exposures right for longer exposures where bracketing images for HDR is not an option due to the extended exposure time and movement of things such as cloud or vegetation in the images.

For this reason the Canon nudges ahead for me.

Although the Tokina having f2.8 may come in handy for indoor shooting as has already been posted it doesn't handle lens flare as well as the Canon. One question though: Does the Tokina have a threaded front end for attaching filters?

I compared the Tokina with the Canon at a local camera store. The Tokina has a build like an L lens. Compared to the Tokina, I thought the Canon had a very cheap build. I took photos with both lenses and the Tokina had very slightly better IQ, but the Canon was fine. But add to this that the Tokina gives you 2.8, and is actually less expensive, it was a no brainer. That Canon is way overpriced.