Sigma 10-20 vs Canon 10-22

[keith204]

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.

 

[Don Simon]

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:

 

[Big Mike]

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.

 

[D-50]

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.

 

[S2K1]

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.

 

[shorty6049]

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.

 

[keith204]

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.

 

[astrostu]

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.

 

[keith204]

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.

is the Sigma not?

 

[DSLR noob]

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.

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.

 

[shorty6049]

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)

 

[keith204]

Well, thanks for all the advice.

 

[Big Mike]

Most of the current lenses that are wider than 20mm...are designed for crop sensor cameras. It's not somthing to really worry about, unless you plan to upgrade your camrea (a large upgrade to Full Frame)...in the near future.

 

[keith204]

True, and I don't plan on going full-frame in the near future. I imagine I'll keep crop sensor cameras for awhile. I like shooting sports, and crop works great for that.

 

[keith204]

Right now, I'm content with my track equipment...the equipment that makes me the most money so far. (my 70-200 and my camera). I couldn't ask for anything else for the races.

However, I'm on this phase where I'm trying to get equip that will allow me to take 'different' shots than most people can. Wide angle, macro, and low-light. My 50mm 1.8 has come in super handy when I'm the only one who can take great pictures when it's dark. As for this thread, I reaaaallly like the slightly distorted effect of 10mm shots, as well as the ability to take pictures of so much, in such little space. This weekend we were moving my grandma into her new home, and it was an emotional time for her. When shooting with my 28-135 inside her small apartment, I had to switch to my 17-85 to get some better shots. Oh, how nice a 10-2xmm would have been!