Lens Questions

I am considering getting a wide angle lens for my Canon 60D. My current widest lens is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM

I have looked online at the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM SLR lens and also the Sigma 8-16 f4.5-5.6 DC HSM FLD AF lens.

Since the 2 lenses are only $100.00 difference in price, which one would have the better optics?

Also when I go to the Sigma website they show the name as only DC HSM. The Sigma website does not say FLD AF (as shown on the Amazon page). I do not know what FLD means. The AF I am assuming means Auto Focus.

Another question, would I see a considerable difference between either of the Canon 10-22 or the Sigma 8-16 in comparison to my current Sigma 17-70. There are times I wish I did not have to back up more to get what I want in the shot, and sometimes I cannot back up enough.

Is there another lens that would be a better lens from either the Canon or Sigma without costing me too much more?

I do not want a fish-eye lens that distorts the picture.

Thank you

FLD is just sales-speak for special....
see: linky

8mm is significantly wider than 10mm. If wide is what you want, get the 8-16.

Some considerations...1st of all the Sigma web site does show the FLD glass (see image below). You can read the marketing hype at https://www.dpreview.c​om …/7535199785/sig​mafldglass.

Also the Sigma outlet shows a refurbished copy of that lens at $529 (see https://www.sigmaphoto​.com …f45-56-dc-hsm-refurbished). That may be a consideration. Also check the cost of a lens hood for both lenses. Sometimes Sigma includes it, Canon rarely does. I see by the Sigma site mention of a front adapter but I'm not certain what that is.

Lastly keep in mind that the Canon offers about 1-stop more light capability. If you intend to do low light level photography that may be a consideration. Neither are "fast" lenses however.

Thank you all for your comments.

I am torn between getting the extra 2mm width (with the re-furbished price)(Thank you John for that notification!) over the extra light Canon offers.

In the long run not sure which would be better for me....

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18349058
In the long run not sure which would be better for me....

That is a question only you can answer since we know absolutely nothing about your "shooting" habits. I personally do a lot of daylight wide angle photography of landscapes and buildings so if it was my decision, I would lean toward the Sigma. But what draws me there is your comment about the Canon being extra light. My personal preference is equipment with some weight (call it "heft") because I think it helps improve hand held steadiness; that is just my opinion. Yours could differ obviously. I do not do long hikes like I did while much younger so light weight is not necessarily a must.

Are you just considering the purchase based on specifications or have you actually gone to a retail establishment where you can try the lenses?

John from PA wrote in post #18349075
That is a question only you can answer since we know absolutely nothing about your "shooting" habits. I personally do a lot of daylight wide angle photography of landscapes and buildings so if it was my decision, I would lean toward the Sigma. But what draws me there is your comment about the Canon being extra light. My personal preference is equipment with some weight (call it "heft") because I think it helps improve hand held steadiness; that is just my opinion. Yours could differ obviously. I do not do long hikes like I did while much younger so light weight is not necessarily a must.

Are you just considering the purchase based on specifications or have you actually gone to a retail establishment where you can try the lenses?

For me to go to a camera store is a 1+ hours drive away. There used to be a camera store that sold Canon and other brands in my town, but they folded in 1998 sadly.
There is another camera store about 20 minutes from my home, but they handle primarily Nikon, very little Canon.
I am considering the hour drive for this purchase, but may have to wait a couple of weeks...

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18349095
I am considering the hour drive for this purchase, but may have to wait a couple of weeks...

The Sigma refurb could be gone by then. Really weight the light capability differences and weight ramifications and perhaps jump. By the way Canon also offers refurb lenses so check that out. Go to https://shop.usa.canon​.com …lashes/refurbis​hed-lenses.

There is a new Tamron 10-24 VC that is as fast as the Canon and is stabilized. Having the 17-24 range while redundant with your 17-70 might help reduce the number of lens swaps but if you need 8mm then you need it.

Bassat wrote in post #18348978
8mm is significantly wider than 10mm. If wide is what you want, get the 8-16.

Certainly 8 mm is a lot wider than 10 mm, assuming those focal lengths are measured the same way. But for ultra wide angle lenses, that might not be so. These types of lenses exhibit some distortion (so FL varies across the frame), plus the image size varies depending on the camera it is used on, so focal lengths can be stated differently. As an example, consider the Opteka 6.5mm lens, which is a rebrand of the Samyang 8mm. So, different stated focal lengths but the same lens coming out of the same factory.

Short answer: I'd go with the 10-22 in that selection.

Longer rambling: I would say that 10mm is already *really* wide and the 8-16 pushes over into *specialty* lens, where it would make sense if you have particular scenarios where you *know* that you NEED to go that wide. The 10-22 is a better choice for "I just want an ultra-wide angle lens". For UWA shots, you really need a strong foreground component and you have to be very close to it so that it doesn't 'disappear' into the background; which will only be more exaggerated the wider you go.

At those wide focal lengths, a difference of 1mm is huge; without knowing just what you're expecting to shoot with the new lens, I suspect you would find 8mm to just be too wide for a lot of stuff and the remaining, 'usable' focal lengths to be too narrow of a set for your general shooting. I was *just* playing around with my 10-22 for a little more consciousness about 'how' it works in various framings and settings this weekend; I haven't processed things out yet, but if you want, PM me and I'll be happy to share some of my reference shots with you [nothing 'print worthy, but showing a common subject and how it appears at the same distance /w different focal lengths, how the perspective changes, etc.] once I get them through LR.

if you haven't even dabbled in the UWA arena i'd just get the 10-18IS refurbished...you can grab it refurbished for $240

8mm is a lot wider than 10mm...the lack of filter use can be an issue...and yeah to get a strong foreground element you are practically on top of the object...even after buying my 8-16mm i still use my 10-20mm for a lot of instances

Inspeqtor wrote in post #18348923
I am considering getting a wide angle lens for my Canon 60D. My current widest lens is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM

I have looked online at the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM SLR lens and also the Sigma 8-16 f4.5-5.6 DC HSM FLD AF lens.

Since the 2 lenses are only $100.00 difference in price, which one would have the better optics?

Also when I go to the Sigma website they show the name as only DC HSM. The Sigma website does not say FLD AF (as shown on the Amazon page). I do not know what FLD means. The AF I am assuming means Auto Focus.

Another question, would I see a considerable difference between either of the Canon 10-22 or the Sigma 8-16 in comparison to my current Sigma 17-70. There are times I wish I did not have to back up more to get what I want in the shot, and sometimes I cannot back up enough.

Is there another lens that would be a better lens from either the Canon or Sigma without costing me too much more?

I do not want a fish-eye lens that distorts the picture.

Thank you

Don't discount the Canon Efs 10-18. It certainly can't compare with the 10-22 with regard to build, but the optics are quite excellent comparing favorably with, and even exceeding, the IQ of the 10-22 for half the price.

Thank you everyone for your input into my dilemma of which lens to get.

I found to get the Sigma refurb, there is only a 90 day warranty... not interested in that even thought the price was tempting.

Sigma does offer a 4 year warranty on new lenses.

Canon offers only a 1 year warranty on new, but I see they also offer a 2 or 3 year CarePak at reasonable rates. I don't know if you must buy thru Canon to be able to get the CarePak. Right now Canon is out of stock on the 10-22 lens, but I know I could buy it from many other vendors.

I just found Sigma also offers a 10-20 F/3.5 EX DC HSM lens notice it has a constant aperture which I have never owned a lens with that option before. I do not believe it has the stability built in. I don't know if I would miss that on a wide angle lens. I definitely would miss it on a telephoto lens. It is priced at $649 but is on sale now for $449, that is nice!

No I have never dealt with an UWA lens before, so with what people here have mentioned I may (??) want to stay away from the 8mm end of the lenses.....

I have seen pictures here on the forum from the 8-16mm lens, and they did look impressive which is why I did consider it.

I am surprised to hear there is a huge difference between 8mm and 10mm in the lenses. Does anyone know if there is a website that would show a photo that is marked off for the different lenses, and how much would be shown compared to other lenses?

Again thank you everyone