Which UWA lens?

M

matt_wright

Suspended / Banned
Messages
482
Name
Matt Wright
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok, So i have been considering buying a wide angle lens for the last 6 weeks, I have read numerous threads on here about which one to buy (between the cannon 10-22 and the sigma 10-20) and i still cant make my mind up!

Money is an important factor, but if the cannon is worth the extra i would rather pay for it.

Please can you give me your advice and opinions on the lenses theirselves, and also the best option money wise!

At the moment the best deal i can find is the Sigma for 293 from jessops. And the cannon for 481 from warehouse express!

Thanks in advanced, and i know questions like this are asked all the time so i apologize:)

Matt
 
vfm sigma
aperture canon
quality canon
resale value hard to say - s/h sigmas seem to be around £ 230 at moment, s/h canon £ 300-325

you get a hood with the sigma but not with the canon

there is also tamron and tokina uwa lenses to consider
 
ive got the sigma and i have had a go with the tokina. I really like the sigma, if i had the money theirs no denying i would have gone for canon but i think for the large difference in price their isnt a large difference in quality.

The sigma is really well built, it focusses quickly and is really sharp, just make sure you try it before you buy it because their have been issues with sharpness apparantly...
 
Canon 10-22 is the best. If you buy the others you'll only be making up excuses as to why you didn't buy the Canon... seriously, its much better.
 
i would say its the best. im not denying it is very good but its all about budget... the canon is extortionate and you have to buy the hood seperatly. Do you realize its nearly 150 quid more expensive without even buying the hood. And for that price the sigma is on par with it... my 2cents
 
Thanks for the advice guys, I really appreciate it. It still leaves me in a dilema :(. I guess i found out what i already thought i knew. In general you guys think the 10-22 is the better lens, but the sigma is Much better Value for money. Perhaps it is worth trying to get some christmas money towards it and plumping for the cannon. Jacobs are selling it for 461 delivered today!! :help:
 
If you look at any lenses you can say the same thing... xxx hundred pounds extra makes it better but by how much...
 
There's nothing wrong with the sigma. I've used both, they have different chracterisitics but in all honesty, one is not better than the other.

good test here which confirms that in real world use, there's nothing between them http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/uwatest
 
No its not useless, its just not as good as the Canon.
 
No filter.... unless its something useful like a CPL (makes for lovely shots with a UWA) but it does need to be one of the slim ones or you will run into trouble.
 
desantnik said:
Canon 10-22 is the best. If you buy the others you'll only be making up excuses as to why you didn't buy the Canon... seriously, its much better.
Click to expand...

Or 3 years later you'll still be impressed by the Sigma 10-20. Canon is technically better, but the Sigma isn't exactly bad :)

img_3934.jpg
 
There was a 10 - 22 sold on here yesterday!
 
matt_wright said:
Thanks for the advice guys, I really appreciate it. It still leaves me in a dilema :(. I guess i found out what i already thought i knew. In general you guys think the 10-22 is the better lens, but the sigma is Much better Value for money. Perhaps it is worth trying to get some christmas money towards it and plumping for the cannon. Jacobs are selling it for 461 delivered today!! :help:
Click to expand...

If you can wait till after christmas, I will be selling my Canon 10-22, keep an eye on the Sale Classifieds.
 
petemc did you use any filter on that or is it straight HDR?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top