Ultra Wide

440Hz

Canon 10-22 or Sigma 10-20?

I've used both, and like them both. Priced the canon at €999 in Brussels recently but have found it at almost half price elsewhere since. Meaning that the price difference between the sigma and the canon is about €120. Im thinking its worth paying that for the Canon... that little bit extra and all. Any thoughts so I can write to Santa?

Zillah

Work out exactly what the difference is between them. Then decide if the benefit from the canon is something you'd pay 120e for.

mloc

id say go with the canon but only cause im a bit nervous (probably unjustified) of off-brand lenses.

mikeanywhere

I have the Sigma 10-20 and its awesome indeed. I went it for against the Canon purely for the money argument and nothing else. Here are a couple of examples using this lens. I have loads more and will add here when I get chance to go through them and upload.


http://static.flickr.com/105/315639536_1bc73fd1d5.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/109/316481794_5706e4e7dc.jpg

rymus

wouldnt waste the extra money on the canon. That and I don't trust ef-s lenses.. who knows if or when the technology will be dropped from future models.

Fenster

mikeanywhere wrote:

I have the Sigma 10-20 and its awesome indeed. I went it for against the Canon purely for the money argument and nothing else. Here are a couple of examples using this lens. I have loads more and will add here when I get chance to go through them and upload.


http://static.flickr.com/105/315639536_1bc73fd1d5.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/109/316481794_5706e4e7dc.jpg

I hope the fact I started drooling at the mere mention of it helped also.

Carrigman

I got the Canon and it's a beauty. Most if not all reviews rate it above the Sigma so if the price is not a factor go for it. You won't regret it.

captain P

I bought the sigma recently. I'm really happy with it. I bought it for the money reasons too and it hasn't disappointed me

e.g: http://static.flickr.com/116/311881355_2c361f4e25.jpg

and

http://static.flickr.com/109/311881353_6cf365e0d9.jpg

311

rymus wrote:

wouldnt waste the extra money on the canon. That and I don't trust ef-s lenses.. who knows if or when the technology will be dropped from future models.

I used to think that aswell rymus ,but the small sensors will always be cheaper to make . And canon will always want people to buy their cameras.

mikeanywhere

Fenster wrote:

I hope the fact I started drooling at the mere mention of it helped also.

But of course as it's your fault that I got it :eek:

Scorlóg

Yeah, I went for the canon but then I got it in Singapore for €500 (equiv). Haven't used the sigma so I can't really comment as to whether it's worth the extra money or not. The Canon is a great lens though although someone told me that if you put it on a full-frame camera and take a shot it will break the mirror as it is designed specifically for 1.6x cameras. Can anyone confirm of deny this wild accusation?!

Fajitas!

Nah, that's completly off, I've played around with the 10-20 on both a film SLR and full frame DSLR...Works grand apart from the massive vignetting.

5uspect

I heard that too. The optics in an EFs will hit the mirror as they reach further back into the body than a standard EF lens. Look at the 18-55mm kit lens to see what I mean.

You could maybe use an extension tube if you really must put an EFs onto a EF body. No guarantee it will work tho.

Owen

On Rymus' excellent recommendation, I also bought the Sigma 10-20. It's now my lens of choice, I almost exclusively used it Paris last month, and for all the Landmarks there, it was incredible.

rymus

5uspect wrote:

The optics in an EFs will hit the mirror as they reach further back into the body than a standard EF lens.

I read the same not too long after the launch of the first EF-S lenses. Apparently you can take a few tools to the back of the lens to 'remove the protrustion' but hey, if you wanna stick your 10-22 EF-S into a vice and hack away, be my guest.

the Sigma is a superb lens, even more so now that it's gotten cheaper. Never had a problem with it and although never having owned the Canon (but having used it for a while), I can't see any reason why I'd want to swap.

Fajitas!

5uspect wrote:

I heard that too. The optics in an EFs will hit the mirror as they reach further back into the body than a standard EF lens. Look at the 18-55mm kit lens to see what I mean.

The Ef-S lenses just won't fit into a full frame camera. They won't break the glass.

At least I can use my 10-20 from 13mm-20mm if needs be!

rabbitinlights

Im in bangkok at the moment and have found a second hand canon 10-20 for 250 euros, its in very good condition and the glass is perfect, Ive taken a few shots with it and the quality is amazing, very temped, but worried about no warranty? anyone know any decent camera shops in bangkok?

jlang

rabbitinlights wrote:

Im in bangkok at the moment and have found a second hand canon 10-20 for 250 euros, its in very good condition and the glass is perfect, Ive taken a few shots with it and the quality is amazing, very temped, but worried about no warranty? anyone know any decent camera shops in bangkok?

Sounds like a good deal. Once you're happy the lens is clean, etc and operates well there's not that much can go wrong with a lens. If you bought new, you wouldn't trade it in just because the warranty expired.

rabbitinlights

Im soo glad I went back to test it a few times,because on the 3rd time it would not focus and made a weird sound, I was pretty happy as the money was jumping out of my pocket by then, the seller was piissed.

Ive decided against splashing out for it new...... 500 euros is just too much money while im travelling..... Ill just have to live with the "Kinda Wide" 17mm on my 17-85mm IS......

S.