canon ef 10-22 or sigma 10-20?

I want to get into landscape shots mainly.. what lens do you guys prefer for this? I know the canon is more expensive.. and I want to save some money. But if the canon's quality is a big difference over the sigma, then I might go for the canon. Please let me know.

Thanks guys.

I went with the Canon 10-22mm and love it.

You may want to do a search since there has been many threads about these lenses.

By-tor wrote in post #7919105
I went with the Canon 10-22mm and love it.

You may want to do a search since there has been many threads about these lenses.

okay, thanks

i went with the sigma since it's cheaper, comes with a hood and a case. the canon might be better but i'm married so i was on a budget.

I have the sigma and find it really sharp my favorite lens so far

I am one for canon. Tried the sigma twice, both copies had issues. One was decentred and one had focus issues. I decided to put in extra for the canon.

If I had a good copy of the sigma to begin with would have stuck with it, when the sigma worked the IQ to me was pretty much on par.

Love my canon, sharp and extremely fun to use. No second guessing the focus accuracy.

I Just got the Canon and love it.

blueskyyy i have the sigma 10-20 and might sell it if you're interested. i live in fresno. i've had both the 10-22 and 10-20 and honestly, there isn't much difference in image iq that i saw from it, plus the sigma is much cheaper. i hardly found myself using the 10-22 when i had it so i sold it, even though i don't use the sigma now as much either, knowing i paid cheaper for it, i don't care too much.

Have the Canon and it's fabulous. Sigma is supposed to be nearly as good but not quite but does cost a fair bit less. Got the Canon for a good price tho so no-brainer really. Genuine hood was only another 22GBP.

I've tried both, and chose the CANON for a number of reasons:

1. Focus accuracy and speed was better
2. Sigma had pronounced warm color cast
3. Slight advantage of 2mm on the longer end
4. Although not as "heavy and substantial in build" as SIGMA, the Canon was just the right balance of size/weight for me
5. "L" glass elements!!

blueskyyy wrote in post #7919097
I want to get into landscape shots mainly..

I too shoot mainly landscapes. The majority of my shots are between 17-60mm range.

Whilst I have the Sigma, it is only used for very specific shots.

So, if you want to get either lens because you have been led to believe that they are "Landscape" lenses, may I suggest that you might be a little disappointed. If you look around the various forums you will see too many landscape images which have wide vistas but hold little or no interest.

Maybe start another thread asking people what they prefer as their landscape lens (after you've done a search of course)

Brown delivered my new Canon 10-22 one hour ago. works great.
nice and light!

The Tokina 11-16 f2.8 is a great ultra wide angle choice too!

Check this link
http://www.luminous-landscape.com …/Canon-10-22mm-test.shtml
I bought the 10-22 a few days ago and I love it.

if you're on a budget i'd go for the sigma...the price difference doesn't really seem justified in my opinion...also there is a new sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 coming out soon, so you may want to see what that brings to the table...if i was spending as much money on the canon i think i'd choose the tokina 11-16mm 2.8 instead