Canon 10-22mm vs Sigma 10-20mm

hashcake

hashcake

Gone to pot!
Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,943
Name
Darran, Daz or ****
Edit My Images
Yes
I want to invest in an ultra wide lens and I have decided on one of the above.
Due to the price difference between the two I would rather go for Sigma.
However, I've read that there can sometimes be an issue with QC with Sigma lenses.
Has anyone experienced this issue with the Sigma 10-20mm ?
 
there has been known reports but you only hear of the bad things.
the canon is reputed to have the edge but if the edge is worth thet price difference thats another topic alll together.
 
I have used both of these lenses quite a bit and had a Sigma 10-20 for a while. Wanting another super wide lens I was considering buying the Canon having had poor experience with the Sigma before. I recently tested out both types on lens again and got myself a shiney new Sigma on Monday. I really could not see any difference in quality between the two and unless you really need the extra stop and 2mm I would go for the Sigma but test it first to make sure you get a sharp one. Hope this helps.
 
Tokina 12-24, better than the Sigma and arguably (IMO) better than the Canon (especially build quality).

The only reason to get the sigma over the Tokina is the extra 2mm at the wide end. :p
 
Amp34 said:
Tokina 12-24, better than the Sigma and arguably (IMO) better than the Canon (especially build quality).

The only reason to get the sigma over the Tokina is the extra 2mm at the wide end. :p
Click to expand...

The review in this months edition of photoplus doesn't fair the Tokina as well as the Sigma or the Canon.
 
I've been wanting the Sigma 10-20mm for a while now and couldn't resist any longer. Picked up a brand new one today! Did my part to support Jessops and bought it there. Paid a little more than Calumet or online but got to test it and seemed good. Have 28 days to return it if it's not sharp so no worry with that area of things!

Looking forward to the weekend for some thorough testing :D
 
I was having the same dilema for the past few months, and then I picked up a 2nd hand canon 10-22 a month or so ago from here, for around the same price as the sigma!

Although i cant compare the two as i have not used the sigma, Im glad i waited to get the canon as its a great lens and i am very happy with it!
 
hashcake said:
The review in this months edition of photoplus doesn't fair the Tokina as well as the Sigma or the Canon.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, it's one of the only reviews I've seen that rate the Sigma over the Tokina.

What were the main points? IQ, Build quality, etc.:)
 
i looked at the sigma and the canon and in the end got the canon( second hand)worked out roughly the same as a new sigma...
 
I've got the Sigma 10-20mm and love it. Sharp as a tack! I believe the Canon overall is a better lens but the extra in cost gives Sigma the edge. If you can afford the Canon go for it.

Paul
 
Amp34 said:
That's interesting, it's one of the only reviews I've seen that rate the Sigma over the Tokina.

What were the main points? IQ, Build quality, etc.:)
Click to expand...

They said 'Sharpness is disapointing and more colour fringing than most'.

Too be fair, they said this about the Sigma: 'Poor sharpness at frame edges, often overexposed during tests'.

They have also said about the Sigma: 'This old favourite of ours can deliver impressive results as long as you steer clear of it's widest apertures and keep an eye on exposure'.

The only complaint they made about the canon is that the hood is another £30.
 
Merovingian said:
I must have seen a rogue issue, as it rated, at least numerically, the Tokina highest!
Click to expand...

That's the 11-16mm they are refering to not the 12-24.
 
Ant said:
TBH, i've been searching for the 10-22 everywhere, and it's very hard to get hold of 2nd hand.
Click to expand...

Removed
 
10-22 come up fairly regularly on the for sale section, but go as quickly. The only thing I can suggest is keep an eye out
 
I have tried both the Canon and the Sigma and cant split them.You are quite right to be concerned with Sigma QC----but only if buying used.If buying new Sigma service and replacement is first class.If there are any issues with a new lens your local dealer is likely to replace on the spot or if out of stock you are looking at 7-10 days.For me at that money the Sigma was a no brainer.I love the barrel distortion at 10mm super close and rarely use corrective software.Like a lot of Sigs its also V sharp.Terrific value IMHO.
Pete.
 
I must say I'm very happy with my sigma. It's probably my most used lens.
Hearing people saying that the Canon is sharper sounds a bit weird to me. Canon is probably (or definitely, I haven't tried it myself) sharper wide open. But both lenses produce the same incredible sharpness when stopped down. I never use my 10-20 at apertures faster than f/11, because I gain nothing from it. If I wanted a lens to separate the subject from the background, then I would use my nifty fifty or my 120-300 f/2.8. Even wide open and at close distances, an ultra wide lens will always give enough detail to the background to render it distracting. So, why bother shooting wide open?

This lens is so wide that I can handhold it to as low as 1/10 sec exposures, and i did have success handholding it at 1/5 sec. And I printed A0 size prints and exhibited them, with people almost touching their noses to the photo and still seeing the fine detail.

This lens did pay itself but I wouldn't buy the Canon just for the IQ difference because for my needs, there isn't any. I don't need the better built quality (the sigma is built like a tank, if the canon is better it must be really good) because I don't abuse my lenses (except from my 120-300 2.8 who has seen better days cosmetically :P).

So my advice would be, go for the Sigma. They did fix their quality control with this lens. The problem stopped with lenses whose serial number begins with 103, i.e 2-3 years ago.
 
Got to love the Tokina 11-16. Worth a look. Only had mine a very short time and the results so far have been very pleasing.

3180946690_8143cd26b4.jpg
 
I just personally bought the 10-22, so i'll let you know what i think when it arrives. I refused Calumet's price on a 10-20, so i spent a few quid more on a 10-22.
 
I've got the Sigma on a Nikon D200 as all Sigma lenses it's sharp (better than the Nikon lenses I own) but its body looks anyway cheap and fragile.
 
The Canon is the one to have... and saying things like "its better than the Sigma in every respect except the price" is really quite ridiculous... its just simply "better" and usually in life that does mean "more expensive".

I wish Nikon had something as good as the Canon 10-22....
 
it comes to price at the end of the day, i took on the sigma because i thought that the difference in price and quality wasnt worth it. Especially considering you have to buy the hood separatly.

I love my sigma and im very happy with it :D
 
desantnik said:
The Canon is the one to have... and saying things like "its better than the Sigma in every respect except the price" is really quite ridiculous... its just simply "better" and usually in life that does mean "more expensive".
Click to expand...

I don't think it's ridiculous to say that (clearly, as I did say it :D).

Yes, "better" products often cost more, but price is a factor in buying, just like aberrations, resolving power, etc.

For Stylgeo, the Sigma was better, because there was little performance difference for his uses, and spending that much extra would have resulted in little or no gain. For me, it was worth it, largely because I do often use the lens wide open (gigs, events, parties, etc) therefore justifying the cost.
 
I have been offered a nearly new one of these for £250 is that too much or a fair price to pay. I need to let him know by 4.30pm today!!!
 
i wouldnt feel like i had paid too much there :D
 
250 is a good price for the Canon, goferit if you can.
 
Amp34 said:
That's interesting, it's one of the only reviews I've seen that rate the Sigma over the Tokina.

What were the main points? IQ, Build quality, etc.:)
Click to expand...

In my opinion too much emphasis can be placed on reviews as there are a few variables between each review such as the parameters of the test, obviously different copies of the lens on test, the reviewers own personal opinion, and lastly who's to know there is not a bit of encouragement from manufacturers for a result in their favour.
 
Ant said:
That's an awfully good price for the canon.

Buy it, and sell it again for £350.

Whilst it#s on the high side for a sigma. They were retailing for £275 at calumet last week.
Click to expand...

yeah to me!
 
Meirion 658 said:
I have been offered a nearly new one of these for £250 is that too much or a fair price to pay. I need to let him know by 4.30pm today!!!
Click to expand...

I agree, it's very cheap especially by today's standards, as long as it's legit of course :thinking::suspect: If it is, then you have a bargain :)
 
All the superwides are going to be fairly soft towards the edges, it's just part of the deal for such an engineering feat.

I know a number of people that have needed one for work images and all have ended up with the canon in the end. I did recently go shopping with my mum for one of these and she went for the siggy. The first one the shop pulled off the shelf was woefully poor and soft across the whole frame, the second, really sharp. Does seem to me that whilst you might feel a bit of a pain in the shop, get them to open as many as you can and take the best of the pick. :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top