Need an ultra-wide angle...finally!

So I've been putting off investing in one, partially because I plan on getting a 1DMkIV at some point and partially because I've not had any jobs which would require it. Fortunately (or unfortunately), I'm getting requests for some real estate photography so I'll need to get one, and soon.

Anywho, I don't want the Canon. It's too expensive and I prefer a fixed aperture across the zoom.

Been looking at the Tokinas. Deciding between the two (11-16 f2.8 or the 12-24 f4). I don't really need the f2.8. The price difference between the two is only about $110 so wondering whether it's worth it to get the faster lens even if I don't plan on shooting wide at f2.8 much.

What say you Canon gurus?

Thanks.

Well it's not only fast, it's suppose to be a little sharper. If you can afford it I would get the 11-16mm so you don't just have the 12-24mm wondering what it would look like if you had the 11-16mm.. It's one of the sharpest wide angles lenses you can buy, so if it's ultra wide you need, you should be more then happy with it

I have no experience of the 12-24 but I have tried the 11-16 on my 5Dc and 1D4 and I was impressed. The one I tried was a very nice piece of kit. This lens is designed to work on 1.5/1.6 crop sensors, however they do work on larger sensors. Vignetting can be corrected so on a 1.3 crop it's a 12mm (better at 13) to 16mm lens and on full frame it's almost a prime - but it works and it works well.
If only this was a full frame lens - yes it would be a bit OTT - but there would be one in my bag!

do you have a good tripod?

Thanks. This is what I pretty much thought, which is why I've started looking heavier at the 11-16 (I was sold on the 12-24 before).

Yes, I have a good tripod and shoot with it most of the time (except sports and nature photography).

I have the 12-24 F4 and love it. Look at the distortion figures at the wide end if that bothers you. The 12-24 is very low distortion but the distortion that is there can easily be corrected with PTlens sw. I wish it had something like 12-35 range. I'm always running it either at the widest or longest end. Would the 16 of the 11-16 limit you?

Get the 12-24, it's the one you want

The 11-16 is extremely limiting in range, but it certainly delivers, most of my landscapes are shot with one

TLR wrote in post #13141866
I have the 12-24 F4 and love it. Look at the distortion figures at the wide end if that bothers you. The 12-24 is very low distortion but the distortion that is there can easily be corrected with PTlens sw. I wish it had something like 12-35 range. I'm always running it either at the widest or longest end. Would the 16 of the 11-16 limit you?

I'll only be using it when I've got to shoot something wide. I've got plenty of other glass so the 16 won't limit me. I just need something wide and it seems Tokina has the best right now. I can't justify the ridiculous amount on the Canon and I hate that it's not a fixed aperture across the range.

I've heard of flare issues and other things on the older Tokina wide-angles but I've read nothing but good reviews of the newer versions.

Shoot into the sun with my 12-24 and it will flare. Don't know how it compares to other lenses.

Here a video I made testing lens flare with my Tokina 12-24mm
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=92l_H49Nnfc

I would pick the 11-16mm between the two.

11-16 has a flare issue as well, but I just don't shoot it into the sun, night lights are ok

I'm not looking to shoot into the sun but it is something I'll have to keep an eye on with an ultra-wide and living in FL...