APS-C Wide Angle - wait for the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 release / Canon 10-22 / Tokina 11-16 [Archive]

chrisc

05-22-2009, 07:57 AM

I'm getting impatient - want to get a SWA for my 50D and have been patiently waiting for the Sigma 10-20 f 3.5 release and reviews.

Any one have any idea when it will be released

Mark Elberson

05-22-2009, 09:42 AM

I have the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 and love it! After reading several of Bryan's Sigma lens reviews Ihave becomevery wary of them. It seems like every one he gets his hands on has both focusing issues along with softness on one side of the lens. Also, what does the new Sigma cost? The reason to buy the old Sigma 10-20 over the Canon was a $200 premium for the Canon version but Sigma's latest releases seem to be getting much closer to Canon's prices. From what I hear, Tokina owners can't say enough good things about their ultra wides. I know that the 12-24 f/4 is extremely popular. The 11-16 f/2.8 is fast but as far as zooms go, at 1.5Xit's not that versatile.

gunslinge

05-22-2009, 10:20 AM

My cheap Sigma 28-200 never had any focus problems, but I have read so many reviews that talk about focus problems. My Tokina 12-24 is very sharp, well built unit, I love it.

Bill

District_History_Fan

05-24-2009, 11:56 AM

I dunno when the new version will be released.

The older 10-20 has been in my bag for the last few years and has performed superbly. It does have some distortion at 10mm, but is very sharp and has proven to be durable thru some rough use. Personally, as much as I like constant aperture lenses, I'd get the current version and save a few $$$.

STL

05-24-2009, 12:10 PM

I'm getting impatient - want to get a SWA for my 50D and have been patiently waiting for the Sigma 10-20 f 3.5 release and reviews.

Any one have any idea when it will be released

A Sigma representative at the D-Clic expo (in Montreal) told me it would be released in September. I am eager to see how it will compare to the current f/4.5-5.6, as I own it. I had no problem whatsoever with my copy, though the distorsion is indeed high at 10mm.

I tried once to mount it on my friend's 5D (even though the lens has an EF mount, it's meant to be used on a crop factor body). It seems it would work as a 14-20mm on full-frame sensors, which is 2mm wider than the current Canon offering (16-35mm f/2.8L). The heavy vignetting at 10mm makes the picture looks like it has been taken with a circular fisheye. Funny !

Benjamin

05-24-2009, 01:03 PM

I think in no way you will be wrong if you buy the 10-22 from Canon, it's quite a capable lens offering the 16-35 range on FF. I had a short experience with it and I loved it. The only thing that I see people get third party SWA lenses is either because of $ or because some of them offers faster aperture like a F2.8. However, if you think that a F3.5~4.5 is good enough for you, I could suggest the Canon without a doubt.

IMO, i'll stay clear with Sigma zooms as they never come to satisfy me (although the new 24-70/2.8 seems promising.), the focusing problem is a concern as well. Some of their recent prime lenses seem to be good as I once owned the 150/2.8 Macro; I also used the Sigma 50/1.4 and it's a nice lens overall.

(sorry, got the very first sentence wrong, have edited)

District_History_Fan

05-24-2009, 02:08 PM

Many of the third party crop camera ultrawides do offer advantages to Canon's 10-22. Using the Sigma as an example (since I chose it over the Canon in a side by side comparison the day I purchsed the lens), you get a 4 year warranty, better build quality, a lens hood, and a nice carry case all for considerably less money than the OEM lens. If you added those items to the OEM (obviously, build quality is one you can't add), the price difference would really be pronounced.

Honestly, it's personal preference as to which lens to buy. That said, the Sigma offers fantastic IQ and is a bargain. The much talked about focusing issues don't apply to the 10-20. Even if they did, its much less critical an issue on an ultrawide than a fast prime.

crosbyharbison

05-24-2009, 06:32 PM

<style>

</style>



<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document" />
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12" />
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12" />
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:\Users\CROSBY~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_filelist.xml" />
<link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:\Users\CROSBY~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_themedata.thmx" />
<link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:\Users\CROSBY~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_colorschememapping.xml" />
For what it’s worth, I am evaluating a Tokina 12-24 f/4 this weekend. One of
the best things (in my opinion) is the af/mf 'switch.' You can just push and
pull the focusing ring to toggle (it becomes larger for MF, and tucks away slightly when autofocus is enabled). Vignetting is pretty strong wide open but is easy to fix in post. The lens becomes sharp at f/5.6 with the
corners improving up to f/8.0. The field of view is very noticeably wider than
the human eye and distortion is well controlled. I'm not sure how much wider
10mm would be, but it would be interesting to try out the Canon before I went
with this.
<p class="MsoNormal"]<o:p></o:p>
<p class="MsoNormal"]<o:p></o:p>