DSLRUsers.com

I have a 400D and I have decided that at the end of the year I am going to make a few little aquisitions (ok with the global capital market meltdown it does seem like a few might turn into one... but hey its a start).

Basically I've been rather influenced by my bf who is a camera (unfortunately Nikon) nut and he generally gets to pick my camera gear seeing as he seems to know so much more about it and gets so enthusiastic.... but i thought seeing as i am on the forum getting a broader range of opinions can only help. Currently considering the following (short listed by Nikon nut)

1) Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8

but just looking i guess for suggestions and opinions and oh better yet experiences - i had a little search through the web and so far so good... but yer

the tokina is amazing i borrowed one of my friedn Yip great guy to have lent it to me

it has several adantages over the nikon equivalent the 12-24 f4

1st its f2.8 throughout the whole range

2nd costs half the price

3rd its sharper and wider

ive used the 12-24 in the field and it always had a softening affect wide, it got sharper at 24mm at f8
ive tested the tokina even f2.8 it's sharp from 11 to 16mm
cant believe it

but it's an AF-D lens opposed to AFS so the focus is slightly slower than the nikon
but small compromise as sually for this sort of lens its a landscape thing lens and you dont need ultra fast focus for that purpose

wendellt wrote:the tokina is amazing i borrowed one of my friedn Yip great guy to have lent it to me

it has several adantages over the nikon equivalent the 12-24 f4

1st its f2.8 throughout the whole range

2nd costs half the price

3rd its sharper and wider

ive used the 12-24 in the field and it always had a softening affect wide, it got sharper at 24mm at f8
ive tested the tokina even f2.8 it's sharp from 11 to 16mm
cant believe it

but it's an AF-D lens opposed to AFS so the focus is slightly slower than the nikon
but small compromise as sually for this sort of lens its a landscape thing lens and you dont need ultra fast focus for that purpose

Great info Wendellt! Your making me want the Tokina 11-16!!

She is Canon, so the other alternatives are:

Canon EF-S 10-22 (is it worth the cost, Mr Rockwell says it is the best of the Ultrawides for a Canon)
Sigma 10-20 HSM (I was really impressed with using the Nikon Version, thanks Mr Darcy, and CR Kennedy will match grey prices)
Tokina 12-24 (Nikon Version is well regarded by both Mr's Hogan and Rockwell, I like it - thanks Seeto)
Tamron 11-18 (Mr Hogan says "great for the backpacker with weight issues", having used it, not bad but huge distortion and very slow AF)

Cheers

Nice summary Cameron.

mozzie, what existing lenses do you have?

I have the Sigma 10-20, and have been very happy with it. I haven't used the others, so can't offer comparisons,
but the Sigma was relatively inexpensive, hasn't given me any problems, and is a lot of fun to use.

(I should mention that I use it on a Nikon, but I imagine it would give the same results on a Canon)

Yey a Canon user joins the discussion.

Mozzie has:

SIlver EOS 400D + EF-S 18-55mm, EF 75-300mm (ie the Twin lens kit) and EF-S 60mm USM Macro

I've used the Canon 10-22mm a bit, but none of the others. It does have quite a bit of distortion (including chromatic aberration) especially towards the edges. However, if you use the chromatic aberration compensation in your RAW converter it cleans up nicely (and improves the overall sharpness). Not my favourite lens, but useful to have access to from time to time.

Whatever lens you get, make sure you get (and use!) the hood.

I think a lot of Canon users are not very happy that most (almost all) of their lenses dont come with lens hoods. All the 3rd party lenses mentioned above come with their own hoods though.

Greg B wrote:I have the Sigma 10-20, and have been very happy with it. I haven't used the others, so can't offer comparisons,
but the Sigma was relatively inexpensive, hasn't given me any problems, and is a lot of fun to use.

And has been rated as a better lens (not just value-for-money, but straight out) when put up against the Canon in a couple of reviews I've read. (Sorry, no idea what the links were, was a while back.)

Yes, I've got one. Yep, it's terrific.

Yet to read anything bad about the Tokina, though.

aim54x wrote:Yey a Canon user joins the discussion.

Mozzie has:

SIlver EOS 400D + EF-S 18-55mm, EF 75-300mm (ie the Twin lens kit) and EF-S 60mm USM Macro

YUPS and i am well was intending to get a 24-70 + my dream lens the 70-200 f2.8 IS.... but on my baby it might look a bit strange....and a external flash tooo would be lovely

The sigma (10-20) looks good - i think we had a persue of that one at a shop ( i lose track because we do lens perusing so frequently) but i was very dissapointed with Canon's own range - and its even less assuring to hear about the canon's issues

What is your Budget and what are you wanting to shoot with it?

Here are some shots I took two weeks ago with my Tok 12-24 which I am very happy with, I also use a 400D.
http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=34237

Even internals I have shot with it came out great.

Bruce

I owned a Sigma 10-20, now owns the Tokina 11-16. The jump was well worth the price difference for that f/2.8 when you NEED it.
The Tokina is already great at f/2.8 wide open and when stopped down to f4 - f5.6 you start to get amazing results.

The Sigma is great with wider and longer reach than the Tokina, it works well when stopped down to f8 and shines at f11-f16. But the corner is pretty soft at f4-5.6 that sometimes bothers me.

But the main reason to switch is that the Tokina offers f2.8 constant, something that is more value to me than focal length on an ultra-wide.


Here's my verdict:
Nikkor 14-24 if you can afford and carry it. (or 16-35 MkII in the canon league)

Tokina 11-16 if your budget is 1/3 of the Nikkor / Canon above

Sigma 10-20 if your budget cannot reach the Tokina or you use somewhere between 16-20mm often (which I don't on the UWA).

Tokina 12-24 if you have a need to get to 24mm and a constant f4 aperture, it comes to the same league as the sigma 10-20.

aim54x wrote:I think a lot of Canon users are not very happy that most (almost all) of their lenses dont come with lens hoods. All the 3rd party lenses mentioned above come with their own hoods though.

Only the Canon L lenses come with hood included. For all the others it's an extra item, but I don't think Canon have ever been sly about this. Just make sure you purchase the appropriate hood at the same time as the lens. Just as for any filters you're going to use with it...

DaveB wrote:

aim54x wrote:I think a lot of Canon users are not very happy that most (almost all) of their lenses dont come with lens hoods. All the 3rd party lenses mentioned above come with their own hoods though.

Only the Canon L lenses come with hood included. For all the others it's an extra item, but I don't think Canon have ever been sly about this. Just make sure you purchase the appropriate hood at the same time as the lens. Just as for any filters you're going to use with it...

I thought it was only some of the BIG WHITE L's. Oh well your the Canon user, you would have a better idea. It just seems strange that Canon does not throw it in like Nikon and the 3rd party manufacturers.

mozzie wrote:was intending to get a 24-70 + my dream lens the 70-200 f2.8 IS.... but on my baby it might look a bit strange

Is he even a Canon mount baby?

Actually those lenses do go quite nicely on the little camera, my gf had a 350D and occasionally got to put proper glass on it. Usual thing... hold the body until it's really, really dated and spend your money on glass. The glass will hold value quite well (and don't wait for the 24-70IS or other rumours).

Sorry, no idea about UW for crop cameras, closest I got was a Sigma 12-24 but I barely used it so I sold it.

Chaase wrote:http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=34237

Bruce

Those photos are LOVE!!!! awesome and the bees are so cute!!!!

budget is an issue in that i havnt set one yet - i was planning end of the year purchases upto $5000 AUD but then i am thinking of trimming that budget down significantly - i guess i am more interested in getting a really good lens and spending that little bit extra than getting a good lens for a little bit less....

so right now its Tokina vs Sigma it seems after looking at all the posts - Tokina being a head by a bit ...

mozzie wrote:so right now its Tokina vs Sigma it seems after looking at all the posts - Tokina being a head by a bit ...

I've got the Sigma, but if I was shopping NOW, the Tokina would be right up there.

Thanks guys for all your suggestions and insights I think the Tokina is going to be it - super excited cant wait to get it (just have to get time to go shopping!!!!)

I've got the Tokina and I'm very pleased with it...

It's a keeper...

just got the Tokina 11-16 . The prices seemed to be going up like a bush fire so got it before they went up any further

$749 from Camera Action in melbourne +15 postage and handling

but wont ship till mid november so i have to hold my breath and wait ......

thanks for all the advise guys