Best 2 wideangles out there...

Andy77

Andy77

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,543
Name
andy
Edit My Images
No
Opinions please, will be using on a 400d, 1.6x crop factor

thanks andy
 
Yep no doubt, Canon EFS 10-22 if money no object, otherwise Sigma 10-20.
 
ive heard alot of good and bad things about both canon 10-22 and sigma 10-20, i went to jessops yesturday and had alook at the 10-22 and the sigma 12-24, but to be honest the canon felt very plasticy to me and the sigma was built like a tank, but thats the 12-24 not the 10-20, is there much difference between the 10-20 and the 12-24........:shrug:
 
There's nothing plasticy about the 10-22 :shrug:

I looked at the 10-20 and the 12-24. If you are thinking of upgrading to full frame soon then I guess the 12-24 is your friend. However I believe the 12-24 doesn't have a conventional filter thread - see review here.

HTH
 
i was told in the shop you carnt use conventional filters with the 12-24 you have to cut gelatine filters to size and then slot them into the rear of the lens.. Ok back to the canon 10-22, it just didnt do it for me when i had alook at it, it was so light and it felt plasticy to me ( opinions vary i suppose):lol:, not knocking it at all as the reviews ive read are almost flawless, but for the money im edgeing towards the siggy 10-20mm as the gelatine filters on the 12-24 does put me off.:thumbs:
 
I'm quite happy with the Sigma 10-20, built quality is in another league above the Canon EF-S lenses I've had (admittedly not the 10-22)
 
i was told in the shop you carnt use conventional filters with the 12-24 you have to cut gelatine filters to size and then slot them into the rear of the lens
Click to expand...

Totally true if you're using the lens on a full frame camera but not so on a 1.6 crop body. The lens has a two part hood, with a shallow tube that fits over the domed front element and and built in petal shape surround. There is then a standard lens cap that fits onto the front of this. With a crop cam, you can just take the front cap off and screw a filter to the tube section.

Although if you don't have, or aren't about to get a FF body, there doesn't seem much point in getting the 12-24 with the extra cost, extra weight, loss of the 10mm wide end and no gain in IQ at all.

If image quality is your top priority, then you really should do your own comparison between the 10-20 and the 10-22 as the canon really is miles better.
 
You have only looked at zooms....why don't you have a look for a couple of prime wides?

The difference will knock your eyeballs out. Lighter, crisper, easier to use and less to go wrong. I would choose something in the 20mm range, so a 20, 21 or 24 would be the standard wide choice.
 
To be honest im not to keen on primes, what i want is a UWA zoom.
 
Also the siggy 10-20mm comes with padded bag and hood, which the canon 10-22mm you have to buy separately, which is extra cost again.....
 
I bought the siggy last week, 2 days later took it back and swapped it for the canon. The siggy looked soft to me and I didn't like the colours as much. Happy with the canon, even with the extra £££'s I had to add!
 
Im really in a rut over these friggin UWA's , my brain is going to explode :gag:,
 
Why don't you hire them both. Or at least go in a shop and take a shot with each?
 
Thats a good idea, im going to go to jessops again later and have a play i think........;)
 
Andy77 said:
Also the siggy 10-20mm comes with padded bag and hood, which the canon 10-22mm you have to buy separately, which is extra cost again.....
Click to expand...

Who needs a bag, lenses are for taking pictures with.

If you want the best image quality at 10mm get the Canon. If you aren't too fussed, but want a bag and a cheaper lens, get the Sigma; it'll still produce good shots.

EDIT: lots of shops down here have 'bins' full of 2nd hand lens hoods and bits n pieces that you can pick up for a couple of quid. I never bothered for my 10-22 though as at that sort of focal length you often can't avoid having light sources in your frame anyway.
 
why just the best 2?

why has no one mentioned the tokina? reviews claim its one of the best.

I own the sigma 10-20 and love it, nikon version, but mine is sharp all over and get great results from it.
 
Nobody has mentioned the Hasselbald SWC....or the Zeiss 35mm either (equivalent of 21mm on 35 frame).

OK, they won't fit your body, but BEST WIDE ANGLES.......!

Just being pedantic - cors I like to.
 
munchycarrot said:
why has no one mentioned the tokina? reviews claim its one of the best.
Click to expand...
Was wondering this myself as I've seen so many on here raving about it.
I own the sigma 10-20 and love it, nikon version, but mine is sharp all over and get great results from it.
Click to expand...
That's the thing with Sigma, if you get a good one then they're very good but it's a big "if".
 
I can only vouch for the Tokina 11-16 which I think is amazing !
 
My next lens (for Canon 1.6x crop body) is definitely going to be an ultrawide zoom, and have decided on a shortlist of Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 and Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. From what I have read, they seem to be the top two choices (for Canon crop.)

The Canon has more range, but the Tokina is faster and is £100 less. Hopefully by the time I've saved up, somebody will announce a 10-20/22mm f2.8!
 
I have used both and have the Sigma 10-20, it is the fourth one but I finally have a sharp version. Have to say I can't see any difference in image quality between between my Sigma and my sisters Canon.
 
Theres a tokina 11-16 for sale over on AVforums!

I own a tamron 11-18 and despite its average - sometimes poor - reviews I really love it, sharp as a tack and never lets me down, not so good for low light f4.5 i think is the widest it goes. It like the underdog though, holds a special place in my heart :lol:
 
Andy77 said:
i was told in the shop you carnt use conventional filters with the 12-24 you have to cut gelatine filters to size and then slot them into the rear of the lens.. Ok back to the canon 10-22, it just didnt do it for me when i had alook at it, it was so light and it felt plasticy to me ( opinions vary i suppose):lol:, not knocking it at all as the reviews ive read are almost flawless, but for the money im edgeing towards the siggy 10-20mm as the gelatine filters on the 12-24 does put me off.:thumbs:
Click to expand...

There's nothing plasticy about the Canon, mines built like a tank!!!!! Easily the best build quality lens in my collection by far.

I chose the Canon as I could afford it (at the time!) and it produced far sharper images through the range than the Sigma I tried. The 10-22 is pin sharp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top