I am very very new to digital slr photography (3months). I am slowly finding out the nuances, and am learning about my camera (7D), lenses (135L, ES-F 17-55), and how these couple. Still zilch knowledge on PP. I want to buy a UWA, and here's where I am looking for some help. Although I might move to FF later on, for now I'll first learn crop and so I dont mind buying a crop UWA lens and then later selling that at an appropriate time when I go FF. There are existing threads here that have covered the same topic, and I have shortlisted 3 lenses from those discussions, and then somehow even rejected one of those.
Lenses under consideration are:
Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, Sigma 8-16
Purpose: Landscape, weird artistic street and indoor shots, horizons, skylines, architecture
Budget: the 10-22 is the most expensive here, so that'll have to be the upper limit
Sigma: Really liked the reviews, but big bummer is that it cant accept filters. For skylines/horizons/landscapes that's a handicap--isn't it? It also loses in sharpness to the Tokina. Some ppl also don't swear by Sigma's quality control
Tokina: From the reviews on POTN, seems the best of the 3, I dont really need the 17-22 of the canon as I already have the 17-55. Sharp, fast, robust, 2.8, accepts filters, great IQ, etc. etc. Flares are a minus, but I kinda like them sometimes...However, some people have said that it has issues with the 7D, out of all the APS-C sensors-- have you heard anything regarding this? I had almost decided on this one, but...
Canon: Comparable to the Tokina in IQ, sharpness, takes filters, wider range, worse body, less flares than Tokina...
So, all in all, if there are indeed no issues of the Tokina with the 7D, should I go for it? Although I loved the reviews of the Sigma, it won't give me the skies I want... The canon has no "problems" the other 2 have, but everyone says that if 17-22 is not a consideration, then Tokina is def the better bang for the buck...
Thoughts/comments will be highly appreciated. Thanks!