EF-S 10-22mm or Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

Despite reading all the reviews, I just can't make my mind up between these two lenses, and I'll need a UWA lens when I head off to NYC in a fortnight. So POTN community, which one would you buy and why?

https://photography-on-the.net …398&highlight=1​0-22+11-16

This is a decision I will be making in the future as well, so I can sympathize with how you are probably feeling. By reading reviews and searching on here and other forums, it seems like you can't go wrong with either lens. They both seem to have many happy owners. I am leaning more towards the Tokina 11-16, because even though it is more limited in range, you gotta love that f2.8. I'm a big fan of primes, so if I think of it as an ultra-wide angle prime with the added benefit of a few other focal lengths, I think I'll be content.

I doubt I'll be using the lens much inside so the Canon could be the one for me, I think the extra 10mm could come in handy as I enjoy architecture. However, night scenes, hand held the 2.8 could come into its own. Why oh why can't there be a 10-22 2.8!

I don't know where you are but if your in the USA, Amazon has a 30 day return policy. Buy both, try them both out and return the one you don't like.

What I would buy and why may not have much bearing on what you would buy and why, but if it helps, here's my two pence. I can find nothing about the Canon that justifies up to £100 more with the possible exception of (a) reportedly better resistance to flare and (b) faster focussing (though the Tokinas are usually described as very good for "regular" lenses). This is the only focal length in which fast focussing is not very important to me, so that leaves the flare resistance. 11mm is wide enough; 16mm is long enough. So all things considered, I'm still leaning strongly towards the Tokina, though I'm waiting now to see where prices go if and when the pound recovers a little, the Tamron 10-24 arrives and provides more competition, Tokina improves availability, and/or sales dip further. I have a hunch that the price here may drop a bit soon as a result of all that.

sa_20v wrote in post #6702420
Despite reading all the reviews, I just can't make my mind up between these two lenses, and I'll need a UWA lens when I head off to NYC in a fortnight. So POTN community, which one would you buy and why?

The 11-16 was not available when I bought the 10-22. If I had to do it again, I would still go with the Canon for the USM + added range.

My experience/$0.02:

On many trips, hiking and other, I have found that I am able to leave the 10-22 on the camera most of the time. There were instances where I wish the 22mm were a little longer, but 22mm was "good enough". I was able to get the photo without having to stop and swap lenses--the time savings is nice when either trying to keep up with a group or having other time constraints--and not having the "hassle" of frequent lens changes is nice, too.

With a more limited range such as the 11-16, I would have had to do more lens swaps between this and something longer, or just skip some photos altogether. For me, I find that I enjoy trips more if I spend more time watching the scenery (and taking pics) instead of fussing with lenses.

The added range on the long end is more important to me than the f2.8 aperture.

This is the hardest decision I've made regarding photographic equipment - I've spent the afternoon sifting through the relevant lens 'pools' on Flickr, with my thoughts swinging one way and then the next!

At this time I'm tempted with the 10-22 - but any more suggestions/view points will be very much welcomed - I aim to order tomorrow AM.

I think it depends on you lens line-up and preference. For me the f/2.8 won out over the reach, partially because I have 2 other lenses that start at 17 & 18mm and I love fast glass. You can't go wrong either way, try both if you can.

sa_20v wrote in post #6702672
I doubt I'll be using the lens much inside so the Canon could be the one for me, I think the extra 10mm could come in handy as I enjoy architecture. However, night scenes, hand held the 2.8 could come into its own. Why oh why can't there be a 10-22 2.8!

You must keep in mind that on an ultra-wide there is less of a need to have ultra fast optics. First of all, isolating your subject using depth of field isn't really going to happen much. Second, an UWA lens draws more light by the nature of the beast. I take indoor photos with my 10-22 all the time, it's not at all like taking photos at 70mm or something. Third, you'll be able to handhold this lens most all the time, so a 2.8 aperture doesn't really help you there.

What I am trying to say is that I was worried the 10-22 would be too slow for me as well, but it never is. That said, judging from the feedback I have seen you can't go wrong with either lens.

I have the 10-22 and it's a great lens. For me, range was more important than f/2.8. You can always compensate for a slower lens but you can't always compensate for lack of focal length. Also, don't let the EF-S factor stop you. You can replace the 'back cover' with an EF version and use it on a D60, 10D or even a full frame camera from 14MM+ (it would work at 13mm but there is still some vignetting--it's gone by 14mm)*.

*Assessment based off an EOS Elan

maxxjr wrote in post #6704971
The added range on the long end is more important to me than the f2.8 aperture.

I agree. One of the things I really like about the 10-22 is the range. You can go from super wide to normal so its very versatile. Personally I found 11-16 too limited.

Although it's obviously a headline feature, I don't see the wide and constant aperture as the primary reason for choosing the Tokina over any other UWA. I lot of people seem to focus on it. The Tokina just presents a more attractive all-round package than the more expensive (much more when you add the hood) Canon.

Another vote for the 10-22, although I've never played with an 11-16.
To me the extra range is extremely useful and the IQ of the lens is phenomenal. I'd feel very limited with just the 11-16 range.

I shoot wide a lot and I absolutely love this lens.

im stuck between these 2 also..