hi everyone i need yr help again.=) i wanted to buy myself a wide angle lens that will complement my 30d and 24-70l. m choosing between the canon 10-22 or the tokina 12-24. well the canon cost like 7-8t more than tokina. if the price is just the same then no doubt id go for the canon. ive read review abt the tokina and the feedback is quite good. and ive heard that tokina has the same material/engineering as the nikkor lenses (nikonians is this true)?:Grin: anyway id like to ask you guys abt yr opinion.:Grin: and since im asking you for a favor already, can u also include the 17-40L nlng? hehehe thank you!

jay

hello jay,, based on the reviews i read canon 10-22 is really the way to go for UWA lens..

here's a cheap second hand canon 10-22 though there's no warranty ( if you reside here in the RP)

http://www.pinoyphotography.org/forum/index.php?topic=11771.msg143378#msg143378

hope this helps

mods sorry if i post a link to another forum,,

yup i saw that 1 but its past its waranty ang the price is @ 27k.. so id rather buy a bnew lens.:Grin: how abt the 17-40l any idea? tnx

[quote=Darryl Ong]hello jay,, based on the reviews i read canon 10-22 is really the way to go for UWA lens..

here's a cheap second hand canon 10-22 though there's no warranty ( if you reside here in the RP)


(http://www.pinoyphotography.org/forum/index.php?topic=11771.msg143378#msg143378)

get the canon. brand new one only costs around P36k.

hi everyone i need yr help again.=) i wanted to buy myself a wide angle lens that will complement my 30d and 24-70l. m choosing between the canon 10-22 or the tokina 12-24. well the canon cost like 7-8t more than tokina. if the price is just the same then no doubt id go for the canon. ive read review abt the tokina and the feedback is quite good. and ive heard that tokina has the same material/engineering as the nikkor lenses (nikonians is this true)?:Grin: anyway id like to ask you guys abt yr opinion.:Grin: and since im asking you for a favor already, can u also include the 17-40L nlng? hehehe thank you!

jay

Both are good lenses. The tokina has some CA, but if you shoot raw, you can easily remove it.

I chose the 10-22 because the 2mm is big in wide angle. Also, the P7k or so difference is really worth it. Canon is rectilinear, handles flair very well, very sharp, contrasty, very little CA (almost none), and is so darn impressive out of the camera. I often no longer photoshop it. It's also very good wide open. Stop it down to even f5.6 and its amazing. Stop it down to f7.1 or f8, and it is unbelievable.

You can always cite cost as the stumbling block with the ef-s. But never IQ or other issues. Never. You also have to find a bad copy of this lens. Very, very rare. So, I would even venture to get a used one.

The ef-s 10-22 is anomaly in lenses. You'd expect a wide angle lens to have more problems, but the 70-300 IS and the 17-55 f2.8 IS have more issues than this lens.

It's all up to you.

thanks a lot mel appreciated!:Grin: ok leaning towards canon na..:) 70% canon, 30% tokina.hehehe
Both are good lenses. The tokina has some CA, but if you shoot raw, you can easily remove it.

I chose the 10-22 because the 2mm is big in wide angle. Also, the P7k or so difference is really worth it. Canon is rectilinear, handles flair very well, very sharp, contrasty, very little CA (almost none), and is so darn impressive out of the camera. I often no longer photoshop it. It's also very good wide open. Stop it down to even f5.6 and its amazing. Stop it down to f7.1 or f8, and it is unbelievable.

You can always cite cost as the stumbling block with the ef-s. But never IQ or other issues. Never. You also have to find a bad copy of this lens. Very, very rare. So, I would even venture to get a used one.

The ef-s 10-22 is anomaly in lenses. You'd expect a wide angle lens to have more problems, but the 70-300 IS and the 17-55 f2.8 IS have more issues than this lens.

It's all up to you.

get the canon. brand new one only costs around P36k.

at what store? thanks

get the canon. brand new one only costs around P36k.

at what store? thanks

edit: i'm sorry i thought you posted 27k:RedEye:

Get the 10-22 Canon. I think it goes for below 34K BNew in Hidalgo nowadays.

hi everyone i need yr help again.=) i wanted to buy myself a wide angle lens that will complement my 30d and 24-70l. m choosing between the canon 10-22 or the tokina 12-24. well the canon cost like 7-8t more than tokina. if the price is just the same then no doubt id go for the canon. ive read review abt the tokina and the feedback is quite good. and ive heard that tokina has the same material/engineering as the nikkor lenses (nikonians is this true)?:Grin: anyway id like to ask you guys abt yr opinion.:Grin: and since im asking you for a favor already, can u also include the 17-40L nlng? hehehe thank you!

jay


Hi Jay, to me, both lenses are good...however, the quality of a 3rd party manufacturer like tokina, their 12-24 f4 is at par with the standards of an OEM lens...I'm a proud owner of this Tokina 12-24 lens and have been using it on my NIKON System (ooppsss...:D ) for a year now. If budget is no concern of yours, go with the Canon Lens...but if your on a tight leash go for the Tokina...value for money at the same time giving you high output on the picture you want to capture...my 2 cents of course...:Grin:

last time I asked, it is 32k at mayers. the 10-22.

canon 10-22 is a good choice for an ultra wide lens

get the efs 10-22 you won't regret it, I'm sure I didn't. just my 2 cents.

maybe this can help some lab test

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1022_3545/index.htm

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tokina_1224_4/index.htm

hi guys ive finally made up my mind.:Grin: i getting the canon 10-22 for my 30d na. thank you very much u guys have been helpful!:Grin: really appreciated it! hope you can still help me with my future queries in which im sure there will be.hehehe

peace!:Grin:

hi everyone its me again!:Grin: got my self into a new dilemna..hehehe canon 10-22 ba or 17-40l? may bumibenta sa akin ng 2nd hand na 17-40l @ 30k only.. is dat a good reason for me to buy it instead?=) no plans of gng FF in the nxt yr or so.. wud this be enough for Landscapes shots?:Grin: help!hehehe

peace!

hi everyone its me again!:Grin: got my self into a new dilemna..hehehe canon 10-22 ba or 17-40l? may bumibenta sa akin ng 2nd hand na 17-40l @ 30k only.. is dat a good reason for me to buy it instead?=) no plans of gng FF in the nxt yr or so.. wud this be enough for Landscapes shots?:Grin: help!hehehe

peace!
for serious landscape work, no, bitin ang 17mm. you will miss shooting with an ultrawide like what a 10mm can offer. the image quality from both lenses are comparable, as the reviews point out. the 10-22mm would have been an L had it not been for its EF-S designation.

since you have no plans of going FF and you want to do landscapes, i suggest you get the 10-22.

hi everyone its me again!:Grin: got my self into a new dilemna..hehehe canon 10-22 ba or 17-40l? may bumibenta sa akin ng 2nd hand na 17-40l @ 30k only.. is dat a good reason for me to buy it instead?=) no plans of gng FF in the nxt yr or so.. wud this be enough for Landscapes shots?:Grin: help!hehehe

peace!
If you're not going FF the 10-22 is a no brainer. If you want sharp optics, ruggedness, and weather proofing, go for the 17-40 L.
The 17-40 would have the same angle of view as a 28-65 lens on a 1.6 and 28mm is a great focal length without putting too many distracting elements in your image. Jay J.'s landscapes is a great example of this and he only uses a kit lens. Personally I'm over the ultra-wide phase in my photography. On a FF camera, 24mm is the sweet spot for me: close enough for foreground elements without making background elements too small. Bear in mind that all landscape shots weren't taken exclusively with ultra-wides. A lot of my favorites were taken with telephotos as well.

tnx jay! tnx bernard! i was already considering the 10-22 lens but the price of the 17-40l is way too good to pass up.. hmmmm now im really confuse..hehehe

jay,

i've owned all three lenses. i used the tokina 12-24 for my nikon cam before. great lens too.

but for my canon cam, i opted for the canon 10-22 over the tokina.

if you're really into landscape, you can't go wrong with both 10-22 and the 17-40L.
for me, going for ULTRA-wide is my personal preference...

the question is... how bad do you want to add to your L collection? :Grin:

so it is now 17-40L vs the 10-22. question of compatibility with 35mm fullframe. think longterm.

so it is now 17-40L vs the 10-22. question of compatibility with 35mm fullframe. think longterm.

Aris, right of the bat, I mean no disrespect. I have to get this out of the way so you won't think I am attacking you. Just voicing out an opinion here. :)



I find a hard time trying to follow this logic about ef-s, especially with the 10-22, w/c is the equivalent of 16-35 in 35mm terms. Think long term? Hmmm. When will you be able to shift? What are the cost when you do finally move to 35mm FF?

The 5d is P127k, maybe less if you get gray. If you want used at ebay or something like that, maybe P100k. Will it be P80k in a year's time?

Then the equivalent lens. 17-40 f4L. How much is that? P38k? The 16-35 f2.8L mk1 is about P68k. The upcoming 16-35mm f2.8L mk2 is about U$1,500 (P74k?).

Now, If I have about P138k - P166k then I will get my landscape camera and lens using the 400d and the ef-s 10-22.

The ef-s 10-22 is about P33k. You can get a used one for about P28k. The 400d is about P40k body only. Both with Canon Phils warranty.


If I get a 400d and a 10-22, I'd shell out about P73k for an all brand new set. Though we are talking 10.1mp vs 12.8mp, that's the best we can do for pixel density as of this time.

So, that's P166k vs P73k. That's a lot of moolah to make up for moving to FF. So what kind of "long term" solution are we looking at here? When will we have an 80K 12.8mp 5d or it's replacement? Even if we get that, the price I very much doubt if it will be in the P70k in a years time. Mabye in 2 years. Maybe if used or 2nd hand.

Maybe in 2 years, we can get a used 5d for about P70k or P80k. But that's still over the price of a 400d today and an ef-s 10-22! In two year's time we could have a 12mp cropper or maybe Canon will introduce a 1.3x crop camera for around U$1,500. But tha't still not a 16/17-35mm in FF terms.

I say, if you can't afford a "FF" now or in a year, best not to think about "long term" when it comes to wide angles. You can avoid the 10-22 if you are migrating to FF in 3-12 months.

But if not, and you are talking 2 or more years, well, get the gear you need to do the job NOW. And I say this emphatically -- "WHEN IT COMES TO WIDE ANGLES."

You can always pick a 24-70 or 24-105L or some combo and avoid the ef-s 17-55 or ef-s 17-85. You can future proof that. But wide angles? The 16-35L or the 17-40L will have a hard time beating the "lowly" ef-s 10-22 in terms of contrast, sharpness, flare resistance, etc. It's only 2 faults is that 1) it is ef-s, 2) it does not have a red stripe around it (plus the build that goes with it). But it has the L pedegree where it matters most -- IQ.

Get the excellent 10-22 now. If you move up in a year, or 2, then sell it. You'll take maybe a P5k hit at the most. I got mine last year (Feb 4, 2006 for P33k). It basically sells the same for the same price after one year. If you let go of this lens for P28k, it will be gone in 24-72 hours at PIPO. That is the reputation of this lens. Amortize that P5k for 24 months, it's just like you rented the lens for P208 a month.

And for that 2 years prior to moving to FF, you've taken maybe thousands of excellent pictures without the constraints of a 17mm or a 16mm FF lens. It's silly to fool proof your future for a lens that is not capable of going wider than what you wanted. When the time to let go of the 10-22, then just let go. But to worry about "future proofing" something in exchange for the present is kind of strange logic to me -- especially when we are talking of wide angle lenses and the excellent ef-s 10-22.

no prob mel. and yet another outstanding contribution here from you.

and that's why i said "think longterm". i left it for the OP to decide whether he'll be going fullframe or not. long term or otherwise.

hehehe yeah L lens is tempting but i guess the 10-22 is wider.:Grin: just a consideration thou for the 17-40 for the price is good.:Grin: thanks man!
jay,

i've owned all three lenses. i used the tokina 12-24 for my nikon cam before. great lens too.

but for my canon cam, i opted for the canon 10-22 over the tokina.

if you're really into landscape, you can't go wrong with both 10-22 and the 17-40L.
for me, going for ULTRA-wide is my personal preference...

the question is... how bad do you want to add to your L collection? :Grin:

Hi Jay, to me, both lenses are good...however, the quality of a 3rd party manufacturer like tokina, their 12-24 f4 is at par with the standards of an OEM lens...I'm a proud owner of this Tokina 12-24 lens and have been using it on my NIKON System (ooppsss...:D ) for a year now. If budget is no concern of yours, go with the Canon Lens...but if your on a tight leash go for the Tokina...value for money at the same time giving you high output on the picture you want to capture...my 2 cents of course...:Grin:

Best choice is still the Nikon 12-24 (oppsss too.....:D ) but as per a lot of review tokina 12-24mm is the second choice. If your consideration is the price I would suggest the tokina. Downside, a little bit hevier than that of other brands. Its around Php20K in Bangkok.
http://photo.net/equipment/tokina/12-24-f4//

If not upgrading soon to FF, I don't think you'll go wrong with the 10-22. Plus in terms of sharpness, it is really sharp! I'm not sure if its a fair comparison, but for sakes of simplicity, I was surprised to see a much sharper crop taken with the 1022 at 22mm against the 24-105 taken at 24mm (same exposure at f4.5). Just my 2 cents :)

just got this lens,, been playing with it,, turning 18mm to 10mm just to see the difference hehehe, thanks to some of the guys at the church tour,, i finally decided to buy this glass, :Grin:

Congratulations on your purchase Darryl!

Im curious, can you post a scene shot at 10mm and at 18mm?

Just want to see the difference :)

Thanks!

WA's: My thoughts:

I consider the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 to be the best buy out of all the wide lenses (unless you're a Canon shooter) in the market right now. Great range, EX finish and great price too. Downside is of course the f/5.6 at the long end. But otherwise, for the price and optics, I can't really ask for more.

For Canon guys, you're lucky because the Canon 10-22 is an excellent lens. Great zoom range, good optics and a fair price. For a Canon non-FF shooter I would think this is pretty much a given, unless price is an issue then the Sigma 10-20 it is.

For Nikonians, the 12-24 is also an excellent lens with superb optics. It's f/4 all the way but it's a tough call for those on a budget since it costs quiet a bit and the Sigma 10-20 not only goes wider but costs significantly less.

Sigma 12-24 f4.5-5.6 - DG lens, so it's usable on a Full Frame, but personally, if you have a FF body then might as well get something like a 24-105 L or 24-120 VR instead and sacrifice the wider end. But otherwise, good optics, no probs with distortion even wide open. Might be an alternative to the Nikkor 12-24 if you are on a budget and prefer the longer end (otherwise it would be the 10-20 instead)

Tokina 12-24 f/4 - interesting because of the constant aperture and the low price, but I find that distortion is extremely pronounced at 12mm. Otherwise, fairly decent overall optics considering the price. And might be an interesting choice over the Nikkor since it's almost half the price. But still, for Canon guys, I'd rather get the Canon 10-22, for Nikonians the Sigma 10-20 if I can't afford the Nikkor.

Tamron 11-18 f/4.5-5.6 - Good optics, decent price. But still some distortion on the edges, plus I find the zoom range to be a bit weird. There are other much better choices.

Tamron 11-18 f/4.5-5.6 - Good optics, decent price. But still some distortion on the edges, plus I find the zoom range to be a bit weird. There are other much better choices.

If you are planning to purchase this lens, i have one i rarely use. Bought January this year. PM me if you are interested would give a good price for it. :)

If not upgrading soon to FF, I don't think you'll go wrong with the 10-22. Plus in terms of sharpness, it is really sharp! I'm not sure if its a fair comparison, but for sakes of simplicity, I was surprised to see a much sharper crop taken with the 1022 at 22mm against the 24-105 taken at 24mm (same exposure at f4.5). Just my 2 cents :)

Well, that's something new. My 10-22 at 22mm isn't as sharp as my 24-105L at 24mm. My 24-105L is very, very sharp at 24mm. My 10-22 isn't as good at 22mm as it is at 10-14mm. That is the typical performance of these lenses.

Dont' get me wrong. The 10-22mm is sharp all around, but it is best at around 10-14/15mm (excellent). At 16-18mm it is very good, and good past that. My copy seems to be at best at f7.1 regardless of FL.

My 24-105L is also sharp all around. But it is excellent at 24-40/45mm, very good at 50-80/85mm, and good at 90-105mm. If I stop it down f4.5 or f5 it is very good at 90-105mm. My copy is best on the wide end. At f5.6, it is basically, excellent regardless of focal length.

Of course, this is pixel peeping. At normal 5x7 prints, one would never know the difference. This is why I say it is sharp all around.

Going back to the wides, I'd stick with the 10-22 or tokina 12-24mm. Either one would be good. It's just that that 2mm is really big when it comes to wide angles.

ust inquired last week at canon d-zone @ glorietta and the canon 10-22mm lens costs 38.1K ~_~

my other option is the sigma 10-20mm, but read the reviews that it's a hit-or-miss lens, some batches have lots of issues while there are other batches that has SUPERB IQ and costs 26K

ust inquired last week at canon d-zone @ glorietta and the canon 10-22mm lens costs 38.1K ~_~

my other option is the sigma 10-20mm, but read the reviews that it's a hit-or-miss lens, some batches have lots of issues while there are other batches that has SUPERB IQ and costs 26K

try henry's for the canon 10-22,, last week i bought mine around 32k with warranty of course:D

^ really?

if i remember it right, canon philippines gives warranties to lenses (gray or not) except for cameras, am i correct?

so, if a 10-22mm canon USM costs 32K in hidalgo(GOGOGO!) then i might just buy there na lang :D

i'm not sure about that,, but yup it's 32k,, just bought it last week wednesday