Sigma 10-20 vs Canon 10-22

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by keith204, Sep 10, 2007.

  1. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Which should I buy?

    Sigma 10-20 vs Canon 10-22

    Sigma seems to have great reviews, will save me 200 bucks
    Canon has 2 more mm's and is a smidgin faster.
     
  2. Don Simon

    Don Simon TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    Messages:
    2,484
    Likes Received:
    0
    As usual, it's about the money. If the Sigma is optically very good, very well-built and fast to focus (which it appears to be) then the question is, are you willing to pay another $200 for another 2mm (on the long end, not the wide end where it would matter most) and the difference between f/3.5 and f/4.5 when both max apertures are variable? Personally I would say no, though you are free to disagree as long as your wallet is on your side :mrgreen:
     
  3. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,822
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I the 2mm on the long end is negligible...it's the wide end that we are worried about with this lens. Also, a slightly larger aperture isn't much of a factor for an ultra wide angle lens.

    I think it comes down to image quality and second to that, build quality. From what I read, the Canon is the clear leader for image quality in this class...although some lenses do different things better. The Canon is built very well and has USM focus. I don't know about the Sigma.

    I went with the Canon.
     
  4. D-50

    D-50 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,043
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I have the sigma,it seems to be built well and produces nice colors. Im sure the Canon or NIkon wide angles are better but the sigma is a fine lens if $200 is not much to you go with the Canon but the sigma is a quality lens.
     
  5. S2K1

    S2K1 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    I was looking to rent one of them on Lensrentals.com and their review said the Canon one is the best wide angle(on APS-C) they've used out of all the wide angles. $200 more worth it though is up to you. I plan to get the Canon when I am in the market for a super wide-angle.
     
  6. shorty6049

    shorty6049 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    i have the sigma lens, and i love it. I shoot sony though so i didnt have the choice. I agree that the 2mm is neglegible as well becasue i rarely ever even go up to 20mm on mine. I bought it because its so wide on the 10mm end, not because it can go to 20mm wich i already have on 2 other lenses i own. I dont know what the canon is like quality-wise, but i would wager that you wont be dissapointed with either lens, so if you want to save money, i would say that theres nothign wrong with the sigma.
     
  7. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    After reading good reviews on the Sigma, I have been planning on getting the Sigma to save some money. However, I just wanted to get people's opinions here in case there were people who have used the sigma and hated it. From what I have heard though, the Sigma is good.

    From what I seem to be hearing, "Sigma is great, but Canon is a little better."

    I like that Sigma has HSM. Maybe it's not as good as USM, but nonetheless I have HSM on my 70-200 and I like it.
     
  8. astrostu

    astrostu Guest

    Remember that the Canon lens is built for the cropped APS-C sensor. So if you do end up upgrading to a full-frame sensor camera in the future, there will be significant vignetting effects.
     
  9. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    is the Sigma not?
     
  10. DSLR noob

    DSLR noob TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,527
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    so is the sigma and you would get worse than vignetting, you'd get a useless lens. EF-S lenses don't mount to FF cameras.
     
  11. shorty6049

    shorty6049 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    yeah, the sigma is definately just for digital. my camera was in the shop so i played around with the lens on my 35mm slr, and there wasnt exactly vignetting.... it was more like a sqare shaped frame caused by the petal hood. (the petals look square because of the distortion, very wierd)
     
  12. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Well, thanks for all the advice.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
10-22 vs 10-20
,
canon 10 22 vs sigma 10 20
,

canon 10-22 vs sigma 10-20

,
canon 10-22 vs sigma 10-20 vs tokina 10-17mm
,
sigma 10 20 vs canon 10 22
,
sigma 10 20 vs canon 10 22 review
,
sigma 10-20 3.5 vs canon 10-22
,

sigma 10-20 vs canon 10-22

,
sigma 10-20 vs canon 10-22 image quality
,
sigma+10-20+vs+canon 10-22