Ultra Wide Angle 12-24

www.fredmiranda.com 's review section is your friend, thousands of reviews at your fingertips.

You have an 18-55 now. do you see yourself using those missing 4mm, often in what you shoot?

grego wrote in post #2187705
You have an 18-55 now. do you see yourself using those missing 4mm, often in what you shoot?

I don't think the 4mm is that big of a deal, just that I am making it into one. I'll be using the lens for weird takes on things (creatively) and of course landscapes.

Still, I'm curious about the quality of these lenses. Dorman seems to think these are all very good lenses, but the 10-22 EF-S has become quite popular and people are claiming it as L quality, so I'm curious if it's worth the extra dough over the Sigma or Tokina.

Between the Sigma and Tokina, regardless of focal lengths, what are the differences other then branding and slight build quality difefrences? Image quality wise are they similiar?

FM reviews seem to say quality control on the Sigma is bad. Does anyone know if having them calibrate will fix the problem, or do you need just a whole nother different copy? Does anyone know how much they charge to calibrate a lens if it's not under warranty.

Anyway, I guess I'll get the Sigma 24-70 first and then work from there, I need a walk around zoom more then I need a ultra wide angle.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2187728
I don't think the 4mm is that big of a deal, just that I am making it into one. I'll be using the lens for weird takes on things (creatively) and of course landscapes.

Still, I'm curious about the quality of these lenses. Dorman seems to think these are all very good lenses, but the 10-22 EF-S has become quite popular and people are claiming it as L quality, so I'm curious if it's worth the extra dough over the Sigma or Tokina.

Between the Sigma and Tokina, regardless of focal lengths, what are the differences other then branding and slight build quality difefrences? Image quality wise are they similiar?

The 10-22, delievers strong IQ performance. The only downsides are well, what has been mentioned previously relatively speaking(compared to the other listed lens). No hood(which you need to factor into the cost), the build quality is not as up to par as the other two, and you're limited to the type of bodies you can use it on(more so than the Sigma and Tokina).

If none of those small things get in the way, then there probably isn't anything wrong with the choice, as you'll get a lens that delievers.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2187748
FM reviews seem to say quality control on the Sigma is bad. Does anyone know if having them calibrate will fix the problem, or do you need just a whole nother different copy? Does anyone know how much they charge to calibrate a lens if it's not under warranty.

If you get it and its under warranty(which should be long enough to figure out if your new lens is working properly), then you shouldn't have to pay any fees.

I use the Sigma 10-20 and the Sigma 24-70 about 95% of the time I'm shooting. They are both fantastic pieces of (relatively) inexpensive glass. You won't at all mind the 4mm gap. I've found the 10-20 to actually be a very versatile lens. I've taken interior architectural shots, vehicle pans (actuall really cool at UWA), landscapes, and portraits with it. The HSM is fantastic, razor sharp, and damn near silent. IMHO, you can not go wrong with these two lenses.

Hey, i'm looking at buying a second hand (guy who wants to sell me it is the second owner already) sigma 24-70 2.8. I asked for sample shots and am curious if you think they are sharp.
http://www.wackojackho​.com …FM/sigma24-70/test_shots/

He said shot with 20D and parameters 1, no adjustments.

I like my Tokina.

cdi-ink.com wrote in post #2188542
I like my Tokina.

Is the quality control on the Tokina good? The 10-22 EF-S is expensive, but looks like the best option now, as the Sigma has quality control problems and the lens cap will definitley piss me off.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2188550
Is the quality control on the Tokina good?

I don't know. I don't work there.


Or maybe I should say, "Sure...I'm a pretty good photographer I guess."

cdi-ink.com wrote in post #2188554
I don't know. I don't work there.

Haha. I mean't to ask that to anybody who has one, am curious if anybody has gone through multiple lenses. There is no review on fredmiranda on it. I am pretty interested in it though.

I have the first and only copy I bought. It seems sharp enough even wide open.

cdi-ink.com wrote in post #2188559
I have the first and only copy I bought. It seems sharp enough even wide open.

That's good to hear. I'm not so keen to buy the Sigma or Canon, and the Tokina does seem interesting and has the focal length I really would like just for peace of mind.

I don't think you'd be unhappy with any of the UWA offerings.