Canon UWA lens options
Discussion
From looking at search one of these threads pops up periodically but there's nothing particularly recent and I'm mindful that attitudes and opinions shift over time, so I hope no-one minds another 'what lens,' thread.
Right: I've got a 400D and around summer I hope to be visiting some of the more dramatic parts of the country so I'd like an UWA lens to capture some of the more impressive landscapes. It might get occasional use for architecture and interior shots (kids parties etc) but the main use will be landscapes. I don't have a massive budget - the closer to £350 the better. I'm hoping to pickup a Canon 55-250mm as well at some point and the more expensive options will write that off for the next year.
There seem to be 4 main options that I can see - the Canon 10-22mm, Tokina 11-16mm, Sigma 10-20mm and Tamron 10-24mm.
At the top end there doesn't seem to be too much between the Canon and Tokina - similar price, good IQ. The Tokina is obviously faster which could be handy but doesn't seem to be a deal breaker. The main difference is that there are more Canon units available second hand (on Ebay there's one Tokina in the UK.)
The bottom two for price reasons are the main contenders but I'm really not sure which is better. The Sigma seems to have equal numbers of people that applaud and berate the IQ, whilst the Tamron I hear very little about. They're both around the same price new (£350) so I'm not sure.
Does anyone have any thoughts about which to go for? And are there other options that I've missed
Right: I've got a 400D and around summer I hope to be visiting some of the more dramatic parts of the country so I'd like an UWA lens to capture some of the more impressive landscapes. It might get occasional use for architecture and interior shots (kids parties etc) but the main use will be landscapes. I don't have a massive budget - the closer to £350 the better. I'm hoping to pickup a Canon 55-250mm as well at some point and the more expensive options will write that off for the next year.
There seem to be 4 main options that I can see - the Canon 10-22mm, Tokina 11-16mm, Sigma 10-20mm and Tamron 10-24mm.
At the top end there doesn't seem to be too much between the Canon and Tokina - similar price, good IQ. The Tokina is obviously faster which could be handy but doesn't seem to be a deal breaker. The main difference is that there are more Canon units available second hand (on Ebay there's one Tokina in the UK.)
The bottom two for price reasons are the main contenders but I'm really not sure which is better. The Sigma seems to have equal numbers of people that applaud and berate the IQ, whilst the Tamron I hear very little about. They're both around the same price new (£350) so I'm not sure.
Does anyone have any thoughts about which to go for? And are there other options that I've missed
I've got the Canon 10-22. Its a lovely lens.
I managed to get the chance to have a quick test off these lenses, bar the tokina.
Tamron felt solidly built but had the worst IQ - just generally not quite as sharp.
Sigma felt cheap and "loose". IQ not as good as the canon, softer in the corners and edges. The quality of it put me off - both focus and zoom rings had play and had no resistance at all, that put me off the lens along with the seemingly varying quality of the lens. For example one guy on TP bought one, found it was soft down one side - it was quite noticeable, sent it back and got a replacement only to find that one was equally bad down the other side so that one had to go back too - yet other people seem to get a good copy?
I did think about the Tokina, everyone seems to rave about the IQ and for the most part build quality appears to be good. Like you I didn't see the wide aperture as a "must have" but the thing that put me off was the limited range, my walk around is a 24-105 so it left quite a gap in the focal range.
There is a 12-24 Tokina as well, which from all I read is a very good lens the main criticism is it isn't the 11-16 and you also lose the wide end (2 mm is quite a bit).
I managed to get the chance to have a quick test off these lenses, bar the tokina.
Tamron felt solidly built but had the worst IQ - just generally not quite as sharp.
Sigma felt cheap and "loose". IQ not as good as the canon, softer in the corners and edges. The quality of it put me off - both focus and zoom rings had play and had no resistance at all, that put me off the lens along with the seemingly varying quality of the lens. For example one guy on TP bought one, found it was soft down one side - it was quite noticeable, sent it back and got a replacement only to find that one was equally bad down the other side so that one had to go back too - yet other people seem to get a good copy?
I did think about the Tokina, everyone seems to rave about the IQ and for the most part build quality appears to be good. Like you I didn't see the wide aperture as a "must have" but the thing that put me off was the limited range, my walk around is a 24-105 so it left quite a gap in the focal range.
There is a 12-24 Tokina as well, which from all I read is a very good lens the main criticism is it isn't the 11-16 and you also lose the wide end (2 mm is quite a bit).
No expert but just got my mitts on the canon 10-22 EFS. I did have the Tamron but it was faulty so went back and I did a bit more research and bit the bullet for the extra ontop of the refund. Trying it out to today and looks good but needs a bit of thinking when using I think. But its out of the price range you mention. No hood with it either.
Don't discount the Tokina 12-24 f4. With a wide-angle, having a really fast lens is less important because there's much more "surface area" of the lens to collect light IYSWIM.
A couple of shots from my 40D with that lens... (discount the Facebook image compression...) it does daylight and dark equally well.
A couple of shots from my 40D with that lens... (discount the Facebook image compression...) it does daylight and dark equally well.
I like my Sigma a great deal. Probably my favourite lens, in fact. Very solidly built and feels like it will go on for ever.
A couple of shots....
Church1 by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Green Park by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Methodist Central Hall by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Charlie downwards by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
A couple of shots....
Church1 by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Green Park by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Methodist Central Hall by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
Charlie downwards by Chris Walker Epsom, on Flickr
I find the link below very useful when searching for a lens. You can see sample shots and read what people have to say about dozens of lenses, well worth a look.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php...
It does look like a toss up now between the Canon and the Sigma. I think I'd be happy with the Sigma but if I can squirrel away a few more (well, 200 more) quid before summer comes then I'll probably go for the Canon - not least because even the Sigma owners who like the lens often move onto a Canon.
Has anyone heard any rumblings about Canon releasing a replacement for the 10-22mm out of interest? The price drop that could bring would come in very handy.
Has anyone heard any rumblings about Canon releasing a replacement for the 10-22mm out of interest? The price drop that could bring would come in very handy.
tenohfive said:
It does look like a toss up now between the Canon and the Sigma. I think I'd be happy with the Sigma but if I can squirrel away a few more (well, 200 more) quid before summer comes then I'll probably go for the Canon - not least because even the Sigma owners who like the lens often move onto a Canon.
Personally I can think of many, many things I'd rather put £200 towards. My Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and Sigma 70-200 f2.8, for example, whilst being perfectly reasonable lenses, would be much higher up the list of things to replace.dibbly dobbler said:
Kermit power said:
Personally I can think of many, many things I'd rather put £200 towards.
tenohfive said:
With an addition to the family in the near future that choice may well be taken out of my hands anyway. Not to mention that the Canon 10-22mm costs the same as my camera and all my other lenses and kit combined. The main reason I'd like the Canon though is that I'd avoid losing money long term - most people use the Sigma as a stepping stone onto the Canon (or occasionally the Tokina) and I'd imagine I'd be the same.
I have certainly heard of lots of people upgrading from Sigma (and other third party) lenses to canon lenses in the mid to long range zooms, but when I was looking, I didn't see a single person claiming to have moved over at the wide angle end. I did buy mine a couple of years ago, so I suppose it is possible that Canon have got better, or Sigma got worse. 
Gizmo! said:
Really? My 12-24 Tokina was £320 and I have zero intention of replacing it.
I meant people upgrading from the Sigma to the Canon or to the Tokina, not from Tokina to Canon. And there does seem to be one on ebay for £340 so that complicates things.Okay, the sheer volume of people on here is tempting me away from the Canon (or making it less of a disappointment if I can't save enough) and towards the Sigma...so that leaves the Sigma and the Tokina. 2mm difference but reviews say it's much sharper than the Sigma. Thoughts anyone?
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff