syburn wrote:
Well, I read an article on the net were they show an enlarged shot from both the 10-22 and the 12-24. THe Sigmas is blurred and not clear and the reviewer says that people have complained about Sigma lens in the past (I'm at work now so I can get to my Favourites folder to find the article).
So what some of you are hinting at that a Sigma is every bit as good as a canon?
Because the only thing that is holding me back from spending money is the 1.6 crop issue or is it really an issue?
Cheers - Simon
Hello Simon,
I think there's some confusion going on here...your original post refers to the Sigma 10-20 which has yet to be released. In the following post, hellashot refers to the Sigma 12-24.
I was asking about reviews for the 10-20 and not the 12-24. We'll have to wait patiently for the 10-20 to arrive before we can make any judgements on that lens. As for the 12-24...it is your only choice if your want a lens for use with FF sensor.
I'm looking for a wide angle lens and am considering the Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 12-24, Tamron 11-18, and the Tokina 12-24. I've played with the Sigma 12-24 and Tamron 11-18. Both good lenses in my opinion. The Tokina I have not used personally, but have heard many good things about it.
Right now, I'm leaning towards the Canon 10-22 and the Sigma 10-20 because of the wide end. My reasoning is if I'm going to go wide, I might as well go wide
Unfortnately, I can't make a decision until the Sigma 10-20 arrives.
At this point in time, I'm not hinting that the Sigma 10-20 is every bit as good as the Canon 10-22...but I am saying that we have to wait and see. I would have no problem buying the Sigma if image quality is good. In the meantime, I'll just have to continue waiting and waiting... 
Regards,
Wolverine