Wide angle lense for storm chasing - sigma 10-20 or 8-16

I have a 7D and at the moment I am using a canon 17-85 lense but would like something a bit wider. I was tossing up between the Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-22 or Sigma 8-16. Any recommendations from people who have used these lenses would be greatly appreciated.

The Sigma 8-16mm is the best if you don't need to use any filters. You can put them on it, but it's quite a hassle or expensive.

If you need to use filters, the Canon 10-22mm is slightly better than the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 but not that much honestly... certainly not at f/8. I own the Sigma 10-20mm and I am very happy with it, the price/performance is really good.

Loved my Sigma when I had it but I also absolutely love my Tokina 11-16 and I don't know about you but I know chasing storms can get dark.

Either way, the a big price difference and if you don't need the speed of F2.8, the Sigma is definitely the best option.

I just recently purchased a Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 and I am impressed with the performance and feel of the lens. Definitely not great in low light for movement but my main use will be outdoors. The 20mm is useful in a pinch for that quick photo that you do not want to be insanely wide. The ring HSM is surprisingly quiet and fast. I feel its hard to beat for the price.

Another option would be the constant f/3.5 version but at that price point, I would rather buy the Canon 10-22.

Have you considered the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro ?

It would get you better low light performance

I do weather photography on a personal level so I have rather good experience with it.

You didn't say specifically what you wanted to shoot or what you felt you needed the extra wideness for. Was this for clouds, lighting...?

CLOUDS:
For clouds you need something a bit wider then what you currently have. I would recommend sticking with something in the range of 14mm+. If you go wider then that you are going to start to get some distortion at the edges, which only gets worse as you go down in focal length. This can however be fixed in post to some extent. If, however, you like the fisheye look, then this does not matter.

LIGHTING:
For lighting wider is not better. Lighting should be in the distance when you are shooting so you should need something in the range of 20mm+ to capture it. If you need something wider then YOU ARE TOO CLOSE!! Lighting on a wide angle lens looks small and lacks detail. The only way to get lighting to look good on a 10mm lens is to have it within a mile or so of where you are which is extremely dangerous and asinine.

LOW-LIGHT: You don't need a fast lens for weather photography, even at night. Weather photography is simply landscape photography and this is usually done at higher f-stops. All my weather-related photographs are shot at f/8+ (even at night) so the extra stops of light in a f/2.x lens won't help you unless you decide to use it for something else as well.

Recommendation:

My honest recommendation for all-around weather photography would be the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Seeing that the current lens you have is slightly less wide then this, except for the overall IQ, there would be no reason to upgrade to this lens. That being said, the 8-16 would be the most versatile since between the two you have 8-85mm at your fingertips. The 8mm would be good for clouds, rainbows, etc. while the 17-50mm range of the other glass would be good for lighting. You may also want to look into the Tonika 11-16 which is a very good lens (if you can find it - they have been out of stock on and off for years). Reviews on the Tonika have said that it is very sharp with very good IQ (even beating out some of Nikon's best glass).

All this being said, I still do have to plug the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM which honestly is my favorite wide-angle zoom even among the L glass. If you can afford the upgrade, I would replace the 17-85 with this.

I skimmed over my online uploads real fast. Here are some random shots I have taken with that lens:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Thanks everyone for your replies. 'thephotographynut' I am after the wideness for storm clouds/fronts. A few times this year we had some awesome gust fronts on storms and a couple of times I was only able to get part of the storm in the shot. During storms I sit on my verandah with a rum and click away and a few times I have missed the lightning and wanted wider. Yes sometimes the lightning is close but I definitely don't chase storms trying to get close lightning shots.

These are the two lenses I am looking at:
Sigma 10-20 f3.5 $605 vs Sigma 8-16 f4.5-5.6 $645

Should I also look at the Tokina as suggested by 'Rocky Rhode'?

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 $590

Ree23 wrote in post #14599567
Should I also look at the Tokina as suggested by 'Rocky Rhode'?

Tokina 11-16 f2.8 $590

Where can you find it for $590?

http://www.amazon.com …ef=oh_details_o​00_s00_i00

Kinda old, but just bought mine yesterday for $599.00.