Canon 10-22 EFS v Sigma 10-20mm f3.5

L

lancsoatcake

Suspended / Banned
Messages
197
Name
Daniel
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I have what might be a really silly question, but I've just gotta ask it.

I have looked at these two lenses, but I can't see that the Siggy is APS-C.

Therefore is it actually a 16-35mm or so equivalent on my 7D?

The Cannon is EF-S so will be what I'm after.

It's the next lens style I require and want to make a good choice. Advice greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Dan
 
The Canon is EF-S and the Sigma is DC (effectively the same thing) and all that means is that they will only fit on an APS-C mount due to design. The Sig will actually fit on an APS-H but it vignettes horrendously.


The designations have nothing to do with focal length.
 
Both do what they say on the tin - both will be roughly 16-35. The EF-S is just to do with a rear element that sits further back or something....

I'd go Canon - a brilliant piece of glass :)
 
Ok, so I have a Canon 17-85 already EFS, am I wasting my money, or is that lens actually a 30-125 (or something like)?
 
Yes it will sit infront of the 17-85, just. I have just got the EF10-22 and am really looking forward to getting it out this weekend.
 
Will the EF give me 10mm?

I'm not going to spend £500 for 1mm extra, or am I misreading this?

I'm confused :-|
 
Sorry I beg your pardon, I meant EF-S 10-22. Yes you are misreading, on a crop sensor the 10-22 becomes 16-35 and your 17-85 becomes 27-136.
 
All lens focal lengths are still completely relative to each other, regardless of whether they are EFS (or Sigma crop) or EF. The only difference between an EFS and EF lens (for you to worry about) is the fitting.

An EFS 10-22 is still 6mm wider than the EF 16mm when used on your crop body.
 
Last edited:
I have the sigma 10-20 4.5-5 not the 3.5 version and i have to say i love it. My friend has the 3.5 and i have to say i cant see any difference in the photo quality.

the sigma is from there EX range (which is like canons l range)

Personally..... I'd get the 4.5-5 like mine as its a great lens and it's cheaper than the 3.5, and to be honest i bought it for landscapes where i going to be up in the f stops so dont need a 3.5 apature, and its miles cheaper than the Canon 10-20 and gives just as good results when i looked at photos on flickr.

PS all lenses on a crop body camera (anything not full frame like the 5d) need a multiplying by 1.6 so a 10mm lens is really a 16mm lens..... 100mm lens is a 160mm lens and so on.

Canon 1D are not full frame but larger senser still and have a 1.3 crop factor.
 
have the 17-85 and the 10-22 and the difference is massive and the canon is the only way to go, I can quite happily use the UWA as my walk about lens, it hardly came off during 3 days in the lake district earlier in the year.
plus price has dropped to below £600 new so get out there and buy one the economy needs you ha ha
also as mentione dfor canon crops times the lens fl by 1.6 and you have the real fl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top