Help Tamron 10-24 or Sigma 10-20 4.5-5.6

Hello all- Newbie here. I did do my homework and searched the threads but there seems to be no clear answer or the thread goes off topic.

Simply put, I am travelling to Yosemite and would like an Ultra Wide lens. I really do not want to fork out $700 for the Canon. My personal choices are the Tamron 10-24 F3.5-4.5 and the Sigma 10-20 F4.5-5.6 (Not the Sigma 2.8 as I would simply purchase the Canon at that price).

I am leaning toward the Tamron (newer and slightly better reviews on the web) and would appreciate everyone's opinon. Please only mention the Canon 10-22 if you absolutely feel it is worth the $235 premium it will cost me.

For the record I am shooting with a Canon 40D and will use other lenses 24-70 2.8L, 28-135 IS, & 100-300 IS) as well.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Welcome to the forum! Both fine lenses. I favor the Tokina 11-16/2.8 myself.

The Tokina is a nice lens. I am not sure the $130 premium is worth it considering the limited zoom as well.

Do a search on this forum. I think you'll find most people saying the IQ and speed of the Tokina make it well worth the price.

Yosemite, want to go there again!!

I chose the 12-24mm f/4 Tokina

I was convinced that the Tokina was one of the best digital UWA lenses (at the time I bought it) by Roman Johnson's images of the American West which he has included in his galleries. Many of these images were shot with Nikon cameras using the Tokina 12-24mm f/4.

http://www.pbase.com/r​omansphotos

The 12-24mm Tokina has a constant f/4 aperture, is built like a tank and produces great IQ. It also comes with a lens hood at no extra cost as does the Sigma but, not the Canon UWA lens.

However, if you need a constant f/2.8 aperture, the 11-16mm Tokina f/2.8 lens would be a great choice.

I'd probably go with one of the Tokinas myself.

11-16, but only because I'd eventually want to push that constant 2.8.

i would go for either the Tokina 12-24 or Tokina 11-16 and skip the Sigma and Tamron.