tamron 12-24 v tokina 11-16 v canon 10-22 v sigma 10-20
Jan 10, 2013 16:54:38 #
I have a canon 7d and want an ultra wide angle lens for lanscape photography. My widest lens in the 18-55 mk II kit lens and to be honest it doesn't deliver the quality I am looking for. I find it lacking in resolution and sharpness.
I have read a lot of reviews and am leaning towards the Canon but would appreciate your comments on the others especially if you have had more than one of them for personal comparison.
I have also thought about the Canon 17-40 L lens purely because it is an L lens so to me must be great and sharp though not that wide on my crop sensor, did i say it was an L lens :D
I have read a lot of reviews and am leaning towards the Canon but would appreciate your comments on the others especially if you have had more than one of them for personal comparison.
I have also thought about the Canon 17-40 L lens purely because it is an L lens so to me must be great and sharp though not that wide on my crop sensor, did i say it was an L lens :D
Jan 10, 2013 18:03:06 #
I have the 16-35 2.8L and it's great on my 5DII for wide, but really is just wimpy wide on my 40D. I just tried out the new 8-15mm F4L in my local store, and it's awesome on crop sensor, but $1500.00 (ouch)
Jan 10, 2013 18:06:31 #
I also use a 7D and have the Tokina 11-16. Great lens for me. The only down side(it is a small one), not a lot of zoom. You may have to do a bit of walking to get Just what you want in the frame. Cost isn't bad either.
Jan 10, 2013 19:05:54 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
The Canon should be the sharpest although the link below doesn't illustrate that.
I believe there is a Tamron 10-24mm.
I wouldn't worry about the limited focal range of the 11-16mm Tokina that some people voice as a concern. These lenses are mainly bought for and used at the wide end. Its where I use my ultrawides for 95% of shots. (landscape work)
Personally my choice would be the Sigma 10-20mm (the older F/4.5-5.6 version not the newer F/3.5 one).
The reason being that I have this lens, I know its a great lens on a Nikon D40 & D90.
I have probably taken 15,000 shots with this lens so its not a small sample. I have seen what it does.
I thought the Canon would be sharper .... but I did an online comparison and the Sigma won out on sharpness and CA at F/8, where I take a lot of my shots.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=271&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=712&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3
I believe there is a Tamron 10-24mm.
I wouldn't worry about the limited focal range of the 11-16mm Tokina that some people voice as a concern. These lenses are mainly bought for and used at the wide end. Its where I use my ultrawides for 95% of shots. (landscape work)
Personally my choice would be the Sigma 10-20mm (the older F/4.5-5.6 version not the newer F/3.5 one).
The reason being that I have this lens, I know its a great lens on a Nikon D40 & D90.
I have probably taken 15,000 shots with this lens so its not a small sample. I have seen what it does.
I thought the Canon would be sharper .... but I did an online comparison and the Sigma won out on sharpness and CA at F/8, where I take a lot of my shots.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=271&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=712&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3
Jan 11, 2013 05:44:23 #
Thankyou for your replies, much appreciated.
That link, Lighthouse, does indeed show the Sigma f4-5.6 lens to be the better lens so I am now leaning towards it.
The fact that you have taken so many shots with that lens also makes me think it must be good.
The more I read though the more confusing it gets. No one lens is good at everything so it's a case of picking out the lens characteristics I want and compromising on the others.
Then you throw in the Tamron I have more reading to do :D
That link, Lighthouse, does indeed show the Sigma f4-5.6 lens to be the better lens so I am now leaning towards it.
The fact that you have taken so many shots with that lens also makes me think it must be good.
The more I read though the more confusing it gets. No one lens is good at everything so it's a case of picking out the lens characteristics I want and compromising on the others.
Then you throw in the Tamron I have more reading to do :D
Jan 11, 2013 06:09:05 #
jeryh
Loc: Oxfordshire UK
either the 16-35F2.8L, or the 17-40 F4L will see you OK; The first will cost you big time, but you get what you pay for; the second will do everything you want, if you don't need the F2.8 !
Jan 11, 2013 07:01:12 #
tonyell
Loc: Norfolk
I was originally with the Welsh Federation of Photography and we had several members who swore by the sigma mentioned,. I too have a sigma which i use regularly here in East Anglia. have a look at the wpf forum some one there may be able to update you on the Sigma !!
Good Luck
Tonyell
Good Luck
Tonyell
Jan 11, 2013 07:12:21 #
lighthouse
Loc: No Fixed Abode
One other thing to note.
I just went back to that link that I provided and compared all your options to the Sigma 10-20mm older F/4.5-5.6 version.
The sharpness shows the Sigma to be marginally better than the other options but in the chromatic aberration area it blows them all away.
Check out the "midframe" section right hand side - where the straight lines meet the top scalloped edge.
Also check out directly under that in the "corner" section - check out the inside of the square.
All the other options have significantly worse CA.
This is more of an issue than the sharpness in my opinion.
I just went back to that link that I provided and compared all your options to the Sigma 10-20mm older F/4.5-5.6 version.
The sharpness shows the Sigma to be marginally better than the other options but in the chromatic aberration area it blows them all away.
Check out the "midframe" section right hand side - where the straight lines meet the top scalloped edge.
Also check out directly under that in the "corner" section - check out the inside of the square.
All the other options have significantly worse CA.
This is more of an issue than the sharpness in my opinion.
Jan 11, 2013 07:12:32 #
I have to agree with Lighthouse. I have both a Canon wide angle and the Sigma 10-20. The Sigma is a bit sharper than the Canon lens and is my choice for wide angle shots.
Jan 11, 2013 08:00:37 #
tonyell wrote:
I was originally with the Welsh Federation of Photography and we had several members who swore by the sigma mentioned,. I too have a sigma which i use regularly here in East Anglia. have a look at the wpf forum some one there may be able to update you on the Sigma !!
Good Luck
Tonyell
Good Luck
Tonyell
Thankyou, I have added that website to my list and will be reading that for a while too
Jan 11, 2013 08:01:49 #
lighthouse wrote:
One other thing to note. br I just went back to th... (show quote)
Although CA can be removed in ACR it is far better to not have it in the first place, thanks.
Jan 11, 2013 08:03:07 #
Cotondog wrote:
I have to agree with Lighthouse. I have both a Canon wide angle and the Sigma 10-20. The Sigma is a bit sharper than the Canon lens and is my choice for wide angle shots.
As the Canon was my first choice to start with I am glad to see an owner with both to compare side by side so thankyou Cotondog for your input.
Jan 11, 2013 09:55:50 #
I have a Tamron 10-24 and absolutely love it. Tack sharp and the price was right. I use it on my Canon 60D. I don't think you could go wrong with this selection. Just my opinion.
Jan 11, 2013 10:36:50 #
dfarmer wrote:
I have a Tamron 10-24 and absolutely love it. Tack sharp and the price was right. I use it on my Canon 60D. I don't think you could go wrong with this selection. Just my opinion.
I also have the Tamron 10-24 and love it. I bought it after reading all the reviews and renting the Canon to compare....yes the Canon was a little better but not worth the price difference. Give it a look.
Jan 11, 2013 13:38:20 #
Hello all, I would lean to the Canon "L" lens every time. Why, because I try to get the very best photo I can get, especially landscapes. The reason, I may have only one chance to get this shot, I may never travel there again. But, (this is a big "but"". Adding a lens to my collection take some time to evaluate the actual lens. Mark my words, Canon L glass is the best. The warranty here comes into play, Canon's is only 1 (one) year, Tamron has a warranty for 6 (SIX) years.
Now the usage of the lens come into play. If this lens will be used in every photo session but the Tamron, if only occasionally, but used for important shots, like on a currently planned trip, buy the Canon. If you plan to use the lens in the early morning light or evening light, buy the lowest f stop, if you plan on afternoon, late morning, save some money and look at f4, and save some bucks.
Now the usage of the lens come into play. If this lens will be used in every photo session but the Tamron, if only occasionally, but used for important shots, like on a currently planned trip, buy the Canon. If you plan to use the lens in the early morning light or evening light, buy the lowest f stop, if you plan on afternoon, late morning, save some money and look at f4, and save some bucks.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.