Ok decided on getting lens Sigma 10-20 or Tok 12-24

Photolistic wrote in post #2244445
I really think that would be your best bet. That way when you get some nice glass you will have a pro body to go with it and by then you will know how to use it.

Once you have a 20D in your hands you will know what we are talking about!!!!

What do you mean nice glass...I think i got some pretty nice glass already. I know how to use my gear and a 20D isnt a pro body last I checked. I know what a 20D and 30D feels like. Not to sound ignorant but that post was useless and kinda slap in the face. I dont think I need the letter L in my lens to make me feel I have nice glass. I only plan on getting the 100-400 L only because its the range that i want.
No the 10-22 is not even a thought. I wont pay an extra 200bucks just cause it says canon on it. The sigma 10-20 give the same quality as that and is much cheaper. I will stick with my sigma.

I am sorry I did not see that you had all those lenses. And yes the 20D IS a professional camera compared to the XT.

The whole point of an ultra wide is the wide part! almost all these lenses are mostly used at the widest setting - so therefore it stands to reason that the Sigma 10-20 is the one to go for!

Quite apart from the fact that, in the UK at least, it is better priced.

And FWIW, I would take the sigma over the Canon any day of the week. The 10-22 is overpriced and hoodless to boot!

steved110 wrote in post #2244644
And FWIW, I would take the sigma over the Canon any day of the week. The 10-22 is overpriced and hoodless to boot!

Price is a major factor for sure, but I just got the Canon, not for the name but there was a thread on here a while back that showed the Canon to be significantly more resistant to flare than the Sigma when shooting into the light, which I do quite a lot.

On the hood question, what you say is true, but I notice that you, like me, have the 17-40L, which means you already have the correct hood!

I may also add that I bought from Kerso at a lower price than I can find in UK, and in time to use the £70 cashback voucher too, so I got around most of that price differential.

steved110 wrote in post #2244644
The whole point of an ultra wide is the wide part! almost all these lenses are mostly used at the widest setting - so therefore it stands to reason that the Sigma 10-20 is the one to go for!

Quite apart from the fact that, in the UK at least, it is better priced.

And FWIW, I would take the sigma over the Canon any day of the week. The 10-22 is overpriced and hoodless to boot!

The biggest turn offs on the canon by far is ef-s (I'm not at full frame now, but an UWA isn't something I'm going to replace in a year unless I am not happy with whatever I buy, although I'm not too worried about this right now), and cheap build quality (pretty big turn off to me.)

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2246373
The biggest turn offs on the canon by far is ef-s (I'm not at full frame now, but an UWA isn't something I'm going to replace in a year

All the UWA zooms are for the APS-C sensor, except the Sigma 12-24FF - but that is a completely different beastie. So the above turn-off applies to all of dem bodies.

When you switch to FF, sell the UWA along with the 1.6 crop body and get a 17-40 or 16-35.

Vandit

IF I ever go FF wich probably wouldnt happen anytime soon. I would sell the 10-20 and get a 17-40L

Something I'm looking for in an UWA:

Fast constant aperture
Excellent build quality
Sharpness
FF compatibility

The tokina 12-24 is the closest I find to matching all those requirements. All though I wish there was something faster than f4.

But from what I've been finding from my shooting, a fast constant ap. may not be important as I will be shooting at its widest settings most of the time.

Oh well...hopefully within the next few months something grabs me enough to make a decision.

bangarang wrote in post #2248767
Something I'm looking for in an UWA:

Fast constant aperture
Excellent build quality
Sharpness

The Toki 12-24 has all these

But not this...

RichardtheSane wrote in post #2249395
The Toki 12-24 has all these

But not this...

Ahh..my mistake. I must have confused it with all the Tammy 28-75 reviews I've read..hehe.

actually I think the Tokina will work on the FF its just there wont be a usuable image till around 15-16mm.

I am torn to get the 10-20 and a nice used 20D or justa new 30D

Just if it helps any more at all, if you do go for the lens I'd say get the 12-24. Not due to IQ or anything else like that but you might find more use for the 12-24 range than the 10-20 range, 20mm is still pretty darn wide...
That being said - I'd go for the 30D still if I were you. You could sell your XT and pick up a UWA lens for that.

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2249508
Just if it helps any more at all, if you do go for the lens I'd say get the 12-24. Not due to IQ or anything else like that but you might find more use for the 12-24 range than the 10-20 range, 20mm is still pretty darn wide...
That being said - I'd go for the 30D still if I were you. You could sell your XT and pick up a UWA lens for that.

the XT being sold would help fund the 30D...its either 30D and nothing or lens and 20D
I dont have the money for 30D and lens or I wouldnt have a dilemma

05Xrunner wrote in post #2249515
the XT being sold would help fund the 30D...its either 30D and nothing or lens and 20D
I dont have the money for 30D and lens or I wouldnt have a dilemma

Heh, big "duh" on my part. Ok - knowing that. I'd still go 30D. I use my 30D way more than my 10-20

Madweasel wrote in post #2244817
Price is a major factor for sure, but I just got the Canon, not for the name but there was a thread on here a while back that showed the Canon to be significantly more resistant to flare than the Sigma when shooting into the light, which I do quite a lot.

On the hood question, what you say is true, but I notice that you, like me, have the 17-40L, which means you already have the correct hood!

I may also add that I bought from Kerso at a lower price than I can find in UK, and in time to use the £70 cashback voucher too, so I got around most of that price differential.

Good points - especially about the hood thingy - completely overlooked the fact that the 10-22 takes the same hood as the 17-40 since I use a deeper hood from the 24L. The original hood is tucked away in the box, up in the attic with my extensive collection of various boxes.

I've not looked seriously into this range since settling on the 17-40 so will be happy to take your word on the flare issue too. On the whole I personally prefer to buy Canon built lenses, but have recently become aware that other makes have a lot to offer too. I'm very impressed with the 30 1.4 and have looked afresh at other offerings.