Canon 10-22mm or Sigma 10-20mm - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/08/2006 07:38:58 PM · #1

I'm going to be purchasing a wide angle lens for my Canon 20D. Since I can buy a good used Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for about the same price as a new Sigma AF DC 10-20 f/4-5.6 EX HSM ASPH , price is not an issue. I've seen favorable reviews for both lenses so I need a little help in making my selection between the 2.
Not to muddy the water, but is there another option that I should be looking at?

I presently have the following lenses:
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Super for Canon
Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8

Thanks for your help

Message edited by author 2006-03-08 19:50:30.

PaulE

Canon EOS-50D

03/08/2006 07:52:32 PM · #2

Can't help; but am also interested in folks opinion on this.

basicentry

03/08/2006 08:08:10 PM · #3

Check out kenrockwell.com - he's reviewed all the wide angles and says the canon is the best. Must be pretty good coming from a Nikon user. Good article by the way.

hotpasta

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/08/2006 08:50:43 PM · #4

I have the Sigma 10-20mm and I love it. It is an excellent lens. I have it on a Nikon D200, so I can't compare it to the Canon. But I can vouch for this:

It is sharp
It feels solid and well built
It feels goon in the hand
The HSM is fast
The distortion is under control
I love the contrast and depth of colour

Looking at the Canon, it also looks great but looks a bit plasticky. fredmiranda.com will give you lots of other opinions on the two lenses from users all over the world. It's under REVIEWS.

hotpasta

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/08/2006 08:51:28 PM · #5

a guick correction :-)
It feels GOOD in the hand, not GOON in the hand!

Sorry

Rikki

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/08/2006 08:59:01 PM · #6

Love my 10-22! My first ribbon was shot with it so I'm a bit biased :P But seriously, the Canon is a great lens. I don't even need a polarizer for it. It's got tack sharp focus and the USM motor is pretty sweet.

It's one of my most prized lenses and usually carry it around if I can only carry two lenses at a time ;)

TommyMoe21

Canon EOS-7D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/08/2006 09:03:32 PM · #7

I have no experience with the Sigma but absolutely love the Canon. It's very sharp. A minor complaint is the hood. I think I paid $38.00 US and there's not much to it. And it makes the lens a bit clumsy when it's on because it's so wide. Overall, I'm very glad I bought the lens.

Chiqui

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

03/08/2006 09:38:58 PM · #8

I can't tell you about the Sigma but I can tell you that if my Canon 10-22 broke, I'd eat ramen noodles for a month so I could buy another one.

June

03/09/2006 10:24:47 AM · #9

If I purchase the Canon, and I think I will, would I also need the hood?

fstopopen

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/09/2006 10:28:23 AM · #10

canon all the way. The best lens I've ever had. I honestly hardly ever take it off. If you shoot big stuff, buy it. supersharp. great distortion, and the colors are out of this world.

drake

LoudDog

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/09/2006 10:34:16 AM · #11

Originally posted by phinbob:

If I purchase the Canon, and I think I will, would I also need the hood?

YES!

But also consider the Tokina 12-24 if you can live with 12mm. It's much cheaper, comes with a hood, and considered equal in quality.

I have the Canon 10-22mm but haven't used it much because I can't get it away from my wife!

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

03/09/2006 11:15:38 AM · #12

The Canon all the way, and the hood's invaluable in extreme situations, which you are in a lot with a lens that wide...

Robt.

yido

Canon EOS-5D

Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF for Canon

03/09/2006 09:18:42 PM · #13

same price? I'd get the Canon is it's in excellent condition.

03/10/2006 11:12:20 AM · #14

Does anyone else have opinions on the Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro DX compared with the Canon 10-22mm?

paulb_17

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

03/10/2006 11:38:33 AM · #15

I've got a question regarding the canon 10-22. Since it's an EF-S lense, does that mean the 10mm is an ACTUAL 10mm? ie. it's not a 1.6x crop on 350D so it's actually a 16mm lense?

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

03/10/2006 11:53:53 AM · #16

Originally posted by paulb_17:

I've got a question regarding the canon 10-22. Since it's an EF-S lense, does that mean the 10mm is an ACTUAL 10mm? ie. it's not a 1.6x crop on 350D so it's actually a 16mm lense?

It is an actual 10mm lens but it will only work on 1.6 crop camera bodies, which will crop it down to the equivalent field of view of a 16mm lens on a full frame camera.

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

03/10/2006 11:59:45 AM · #17

I would say go for the 10-22 without thinking twice about it.

While the Sigma is apparently a pretty good lens, the Canon is generally recommended as superior pretty much everywhere I see it.

I also know that Rob aka Bear_Music raves about it's straight lines and overall lack of distortion.

I would say that if the price is the same, this is a no-brainer.

Regarding the actual focal lengths, here they are properly converted:

Canon 10-22 (EF-S mount only, *1.6) 16-35.2mm
Tokina 12-24 (mounted to a Canon EF-S) 19.2-38.4mm

Anything 12-24 (mounted to the Nikon *1.5) 18-36mm

I understand that the wider you go, the greater the difference 1mm of focal length makes. Therefore, the Canon 10-22 at 16mm is going to be a fair bit wider than the anything with 12-24. Only the Sigma 10-22 on a Nikon will be wider, but I don't think it compares to the Canon's sharpness and other performance characteristics (based on material read only).

I think in another thread, there's a comparison picture someone made of shots taken with the same camera using the 12-24 in one and the 10-22 in the other. They aren't really solid because they aren't on the same day or exactly the same place, but you definitely get the idea how big the difference is between 16mm effective and 19.2mm effective.

Paulb, regarding the crop factor, this has nothing to do with the lens itself. The Focal range listed on the lens is always the focal length of the lens. The crop factor of a camera is always the crop factor of the camera. It is always a factor regardless of which lens you use and which mount (EF or EF-S) you use.

It's because the sensor is actually physically smaller. The sensor cannot change size, and the crop factor is a number that is a ratio of comparison to 35mm standard film plane size, which can't change either, so the crop factor is always constant.

It seems like you ought to be able to change the size of the image circle based on the lens you use and how you use it, but while that is indeed possible, it doesn't work to change the crop factor because (repeating just to make sure it's clear) the crop factor is only a number indicating relationship in physical size of the film plane to the sensor.

jsolsona

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/10/2006 12:28:20 PM · #18

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Canon all the way, and the hood's invaluable in extreme situations, which you are in a lot with a lens that wide...

I would love to get a Canon 10-22, BUT the sigma here is almost half the price.. (In canada they are about $650 to $1000 kinda difference) Now, for that difference in price, should I still go for a Canon? it is quite a bit more, does is justify the cost?

Thanks

J

03/10/2006 03:03:52 PM · #19

I just pulled the trigger on the Canon 10-22. I got a great deal on an almost new one for 575.00.

paulb_17

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

03/10/2006 03:21:41 PM · #20

Thanks for the info guys.

I just wasn't sure if Canon changed the structure of their naming scheme since the EF-S is meant for only small sensor cameras.

Keith Maniac

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Canon

03/10/2006 05:04:54 PM · #21

I think that the Canon 10-22mm is a fantastic lens. I am very impressed with image quality, and the build quality is good, too.

Message edited by author 2006-03-10 17:08:07.

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

03/10/2006 10:17:13 PM · #22

Great choice phinbob!

Paulb, the description of a lens's focal length is not part of a company's naming structure.

It's a description of the physical characteristics of the glass.

The fact that it's designed only for certain Canon DSLR's is not enough for them to ignore physical facts.

Incidentally, they have to keep this convention of listing physical descriptions of the lens even on smaller P&S cameras which have even smaller sensors.

FYI, my S2 IS has a 6-72mm lens.

There are a number of situations that call for determining focal length.

One of these is when you need to find the optical center of a lens such as in Panoramic shooting. To do so, you need to measure forward from the sensor plane a distance equal to the focal length in the lens.

When calculating this on an APS-C sensor, you need the numbers from the physical lens, not multiplied by the crop factor.