Wide angle for landscapes

[James I]

After perusing the equipment at Focus today I have been left a little confused as what to actually buy. I try to always buy Canon lenses but a 10-22mm lens is pricey for something I will only use occasionaly, so I looked at Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM & 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM.
I also looked at Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 and finally the Tamron 10-24mm F3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical macro.

Canon 10-22 is out on the price thing!

Sigma, what are the differences between the two? Apart from aperture.

Tokina I have no experience of and do not know anybody who has Tokina glass to ask, hence this post.

Tamron, is a strong contender unless anybody knows something I don't.

I look forward to your advice and assistance with making my purchase, Alex I have ordered the filters too! Cokin kit with three ND grads and adapter ring, so I will get the lens too for the Glen Lyon meet

James

[Alex]

James, good to see your thinking about a WA lens for those landscapes. Only lens I can comment on is the Sigma f/4 as I've not used of read about the others. Just checked the prices of the sigma's on Warehouse Express and there's about £80 between the two with the f/4 at £399, I got mine last Christmas for £220 from Jessops so they have taken quite a hike in price.
My version of the Sigma is spot on IMO though you need to watch then for having soft edges which is quite common. It gives good sharp images though the contrast isn't as good as the Canon 17-40 but that's a different lens altogether.

The filters will really help and will make you think about your shots more before you go press the shutter button.

Take all the advice in from here but if you can go to your local Jessops ( others are available ;0) and try them out.

[IanClark]

For me, it was mostly between the Sigma 10-20 and the Canon 10-22mm. I was Sigma all the way up until the time I was to purchase. I researched recent threads and at the time, some people including professional reviewers were commenting on quality control issues at Sigma again. Sigma sorted out the QC issues a while back but recent reports set alarm bells ringing somewhat.

In the end I decided on Canon because I just liked the idea of having the Canon one more and of course the potential risk of a soft lens from Sigma.
That said, Sigma do produce some cracking glass (not literally of course) and I love my Sigma 105 Macro lens.

One of the other reasons I went Canon was the fact that I have a 77mm ten stop and although Sigma's initial 10-20 is a 77mm filter, their new one is 82mm and that annoyed me a bit. Plus the Canon has the same minimum aperture ranges as that of the new Sigma. Of course the 82mm is to reduce any chance of vignetting but a lot of reviews I read on the Canon said vignetting was minimal and certainly correctable in PP if any was encountered. There are quite a lot of sites on the net where it is being discussed that the Canon 10-22 is actually L glass though not advertised as such by Canon.
Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM Lens Review

I don't know anything about the Tokinas or Tamrons but if you research as recent information as you can on the Sigmas, provided there aren't a significant amount of QC complaints the the Sigma will give you excellent sharp images. Certainly on a quality par with the Canon.

[James I]

Decisions decisions, I have been reading reviews and looking on different web sites at prices, I have just found Kerso from Scotland, 10-22 Canon is £549 +£10 P&P. Anybody know of Kerso? I don't usually use ebay as a rule.

Thanks for the information so far.

James

[James Wheeler]

I have exchanged mail with him about a possible purchase in the past and plan to buy from him soon. Quite a few people on the other EOS forum used him I think and found he was legit.

I imagine a few on here will probably have used him as well.

[Alex]

Bought a couple of of items from Kerso Ian, went up to his relatives for a pick up also. A very good source of Canon gear.

[Hugh]

Sigma, what are the differences between the two? Apart from aperture.

Well in simple terms the price! - The f/3.5 (whilst it has one less piece of glass in it has more in it - what I mean by this is it is 50g heavier. I think this is mostly down to larger pieces of glass (the diameter at the front is 5mm wider). The construction/grouping/type of glass is more complex as well to get the consistent maximum aperture as well. The other difference is it has 7 blades to the aperture instead of 6 (better bokeh).

I use the Sigma f/4.5 to 5.6 and think it is an excellent lens - as I use it mostly for landscape I have never set the aperture any where near its maximum setting so this difference is not important to me.

I have a friend who has (or had) the Tokina 11-16mm and he swears by it as well. I have no experience of the Tamron lens.

Regards

Hugh

[James I]

Thanks for all the above advice, I have had a few hours today visiting Jessops, Jacobs and Wilkinsons to try out the Sigma, tamron, Tokina and Canon, As Ian Clark says, the Canon just seemed the correct choice.

I then took Alex's advice and contacted Ian Kerr from Kerso on Ebay (Flash Cameras), within minutes of emailing him he replied and the deal is done, very prompt and professional, thanks Ian!

I am now awaiting my 10-22mm lens and for Stuartinperth to set a date for the Glen Lyon meet so I can try it out!

Thanks and Remember KERSO for your Canon equipment!

James

[MarkOne]

When I had my 40d, I had a Canon EFS 10-22mm ............ had to change to 17-40L when I got the 1dmkiii ............. it's a great lens and you will not be disappointed.

[James I]

My 10-22 mm Canon lens has arrived, thank you to Kerso for a very good service, he has included an exstensive list of other camera related products, so if anybody is on the look out for glass or bodies find him on the web.

Also I have registered the lens with Canon you connect and it has accepted it it no trouble for warranty purposes.

James