Green Light for UWA

Hello everyone,Current gear:450 xsi -kit lense-55-250 lense,580 II flash.Ive been doing the What Lense to Buy Routine for awhile on the UWA lense.Ive narrowed it down to 3(usual suspects)

1- Canon 10-22 Great but $700 or so
2- Sigma 10-22 Good reviews Price even better
3- Tokina 11-16 Fastest of the 3 but $700 or so

Ive read some places that the sigmas can have bad copies or out of focus(hit or miss).The demo lense sections of all 3 show great pics.Im getting the hang of LR so im getting better results PP.

I can go $700 but i want to be sure its worth the extra $.Im not a pro making money at this but i like to brag alittle when i get that really awesome pic.

Thanks for any and all advice.Peace

I struggled with all three for quite some time and went with the 10-20. It's a very nice lens. Ultimately, I decided I wanted 10mm for sure, which narrowed it between the 10-20 and 10-22. Then I obtained RAW files from both and my choice was made much easier.

Thanks for you thoughts Mike.What do you mean the raw files of both decided it?I havent moved to the raw thing yet.I guess im going slow as not to implode my brain.LOL.Does the Canon raw pics look better?Thanks

I thought the 10-20 was a hair sharper, and the 10-22 was a hair better in color. Other than that I noticed no differences. The $230 savings made the decision very easy.

For #2 are you referring to the new constant aperture Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 DC HSM? Has anyone reviewed this one yet?

#3 for me. It's razor sharp from edge to edge.

Great question macro,Im yet to see a release date or review from anyone let alone the trusted review sites.

Heres amazon site
http://www.amazon.com …ics&qid=1249177​640&sr=8-7

Not yet released,bummer.Just a addon question:Should i wait for this or go ahead and get the other one now?Is a constant 3.5 worth the wait for god knows how long?

Mello,do you find yourself using the 2.8 alot?Thats a real deal swinger with the constant 2.8.Is there alot of Vins at 16mm?Im sure nothing LR cant fix.

Do you shoot outdoor landscape or indoor stuff? To me, if you need a lowl ight UWA, get the Tokina. The new Sigma seems like it's kind of stuck in a no mans land with it's huge filter size, not really low light constant ap and it's price which puts it in line with the 10-22.

Good points Mike,I guess i fall in the whatever category.I like alittle of everything,mainly outside,seems alot more fun.Im kinda feeling my way around seeing what i like or what works best.Sigmas seem good if you get a good one(maybe thats a thing of the past as far as bad copies).

ReDDoG wrote in post #8382906
Great question macro,Im yet to see a release date or review from anyone let alone the trusted review sites.

Heres amazon site
http://www.amazon.com …ics&qid=1249177​640&sr=8-7

Not yet released,bummer.Just a addon question:Should i wait for this or go ahead and get the other one now?Is a constant 3.5 worth the wait for god knows how long?

It appears to be in stock at Adorama:
http://www.adorama.com …hinfo=Sigma+Can​on+10-20mm

I've been eyeballing the tokina myself, especially for its sharpness and build quality.

ReDDoG wrote in post #8382949
Mello,do you find yourself using the 2.8 alot?Thats a real deal swinger with the constant 2.8.Is there alot of Vins at 16mm?Im sure nothing LR cant fix.

Honestly, no. Because when I do use it, it's outdoors. And the few times indoors, I bounced the flash - had to due to light beam is narrower than the lens coverage.

I'm not sure about the other lenses but the Tok doesn't seem to have that typical wide angle distortion. Look at this straight out of the card (converted to Jpeg of course). WB was a bit off on wife's XSi.

I really like my tok. if you don't need the longer focal length, it's definitely a really good buy!

There are three things that you should know if you want the sigma:

1. the new version is coming out very soon and it will have a constant aperture of f3.5. this lens will most likely be release in the next quarter of this year.

2. the sigma's barrel coating isn't exactly the most durable. many have reported that the paint will often crack and peel off after one or two year.

3. many have also reported that it's really hard to find a tack sharp sigma as they tend to front or back focus right out of the box. if you have a reliable shop that has a lot of stock to choose, then finding a sharp copy shouldn't be too much of a problem.

I just bought my tok two weeks ago in Hong Kong and so far i love it! I had the chance to try the lens a few days ago and here is the result.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=731325

I'm surprised to hear the view that f/2.8 is good for low light but f/3.5 is not, when there's only 2/3-stop between them. With their wider field of view, it is easy to hold wideangle lenses at much longer exposure times than other lenses, so there is generally less need for high lens speed. Modern cameras offer such high ISOs these days that you can easily accommodate moving subjects that way.

Although the Tokina is fast and sharp, it has a very limited zoom range, and there's the trade-off for that lens. The current Sigma and the Canon are very similar performers in sharpness, but the Canon offers better flare resistance, which usually translates to better contrast, especially when shooting against the light. Again, whether that difference is worth the increase in cost of the Canon is down to you. Lens choice is always trading advantages and disadvantages against cost, and the choice is a personal one, depending on what you tend to shoot. I chose the Canon. The Tokina wasn't out then, but its limited range is a disadvantage to me and I wouldn't use the speed as most of my shots are around f/8.