Super-Wide Lens Advice

[PatrickCheung]

I have the sigma 10-20 4-5.6 in nikon mount, and it's pretty fun to use. Ever since I got it, I've been really... reluctant to take it off! It's not exactly the sharpest lens around, but it's nothing a little post processing can't do. It's about 1/2 to 1/3 the price of the Nikon wide angles, so I'm not really complaining about the loss of sharpness and increase in distortion. I considered getting the Tokina 11-16, but it's price tag (at least here in canada... being $750) was a tad too high (the sigma was $500)... and I didn't feel like paying that much for a third party lens (if I save up a bit more, I could just get the nikon wide angles). Plus, it had crazy purple fringing going on. Maybe the one I tested was a bad copy, 'cause I've heard great reviews of the Tokina and they're always bought up within a few days of being stocked.

I've owned a tamron lens before... it would not stop hunting, took forever to focus and felt like a cheap dollarstore toy in my hand (everything was wobbly). However it WAS one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used. Despite the decent optical quality, it's cheap feel and horrible focusing ability lead me to sell it. Every Tamron lens I've ever used or heard/seen/read a review for seemed to have the same problem so I stay away from them.

Oh, and I don't find the smaller aperture to be much of a problem. Being a wide angle lens, you can hand-hold shots at speeds of about 1/30 (20mm = 30mm on my D200, rule is that the slowest hand-hold-able speed is the inverse of your effective focal length) and still get reasonably sharp results. I usually shoot ISO400, wide open, 1/60-1/30 indoors.

Here are a few photos I took with the sigma 10-20... I'm using a Nikon D200, so I'm sure the results will be a bit different on a Canon... but hey, after post processing... you can hardly tell what camera took what (at least with a lens like this)! I took these on the day of purchase... just to test out the lens, so don't expect anything great

 

[Geaux]

WOW. I must have a really rare Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for my Canon then because mine has a focus motor built into it. :mrgreen:

I don't think you got 'lucky' lol, your camera body has to have a focusing motor in it for it to work. Meaning, for us Nikon users, it won't AF on the D40, d3000, etc.

Truthfully, not sure how the whole focus motor stuff works, but I know it won't focus on my body, but focuses on my friends Canon.

 

[LiveStrong2009]

Wow, thank you for all the input everybody! I was excited when I got home from work to find so many replies.

Alright, well I think my choices have been changed a bit now. Considering the price is nearly the same on the Tokina 11-16 and the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5, those are the ones to pick from. The Canon is nearly 100 dollars more still. Yes, somebody did point out that I should spend more on this because I will use it more... but I still need to have some limits here, I am a college student with some huge expenses coming shortly.

Alright, so that link that was posted claims the Tokina has the worst flare. Maybe I am blind or something, but I did not notice significant difference between any of the photos posted. Where did the Sigma f/3.5 fall on the chart then? I wish I could tell.

Tokina
+ Wide aperture
Sigma
+ Ultrasensor motor

That is a tough choice there. Somebody posted about another lens that seemed to take forever trying to find something to focus on, has anybody had issues with either of these lenses?

Also mentioned was that there is not a switch for manual focus, how does manually focus then? On my other lenses, if I turn the focus ring and then try to snap the shot, it will start autofocusing again. Do you hold the shutter halfway down, focus, then fully depress the shutter button?

Thanks again for all of the help on this!

 

[Chamelion 6]

Conclusions
Which one is best? In terms of value, the Sigma are the winners - they offer high image quality and they are less expensive than the Canon; other than that, they are on par with Canon both in terms of build quality and AF. The Canon is overall the best in terms of image quality, but it wins by a slight margin and it is the most expensive of the five lenses tested.

The Tokina has good image quality and a very bright aperture, but it is relatively expensive and it has a very limited range of focal lengths; I'd recommend it only if you really need the 2.8 aperture (if you do a lot of low light photos).
The Tamron has a great zoom range at an affordable price; image quality is ok at 10mm, but at 20mm it is not as good as the others.

This is from the comparison... The Sigma 3.5 (referred to in the test as the 10-22n) outperformed all of them except the Canon and there wasn't enough difference to justify the price. I didn't have access to any of these lenses before I bought mine so I spent about a month pouring over comparisions and reviews and they pretty much all came to these same conclusions, that's why I chose this lens. I think they're all good lenses, but Sigma happened to hit one out of the park with this one.

Yeah... I'm pretty proud of this lens.​

 

[LiveStrong2009]

Well, I guess it seems that I will be extremely happy with either choice. I still have a little while to think about it before Christmas bonuses come around...

Thanks!

 

[Dao]

WOW. I must have a really rare Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for my Canon then because mine has a focus motor built into it. :mrgreen:

I don't think you got 'lucky' lol, your camera body has to have a focusing motor in it for it to work. Meaning, for us Nikon users, it won't AF on the D40, d3000, etc.

Truthfully, not sure how the whole focus motor stuff works, but I know it won't focus on my body, but focuses on my friends Canon.

It could be that the Tokina lens design is a little different in Nikon than Canon mount. It's because all Canon EOS cameras (film or digital) do not have focus motor in the bodies. So if anyone make a lens for Canon EOS body and need AF work, they need to put the focus motor inside the lens.

 

[table1349]

This is probably the best on line source to check the review of lenses. Not a single test like most places, but reviews from hundreds of actual owners with their own experiences. FM Reviews - Main Index
FM Reviews - EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon
FM Reviews - 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM Sigma
FM Reviews - AT-X 116 PRO DX Tokina
FM Reviews - AF 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Tamron

Excellent site to view photos shot with virtually any lens available. http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browsecategories?typeId=7

 

[cfusionpm]

Take a look at this comparison. It covers most of the common ultra wide zoom lens for Canon.

In addition, he's done a review of the more recent 8-16mm from Sigma: Juza Nature Photography

I would personally go for the Canon EF-S 10-22mm (which I did). I have been very pleased with this lens and its performance.

 

[Yellow Wagon]

Tokina 11-16 hands down