[Kombisaurus]

Hey guys,

I've got a dillemma!

I've decided to sell my old Olympus C750 and put the funds towards a wide-angle zoom for my Canon 350D. I've only taken about 2 shots with the Oly since I bought the Canon, and they were just to compare the images with the Canon. I'd get much more use out of a new lens than keeping the camera I think.

Now as for my lens choice, I've been drooling over the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 which seems to have an excellent reputation and the images I've seen from it are stunning... but the price is less than stunning The best I've found so far in Australia is AU$1200. That's too much for me at the moment, even with the $$$ from selling my Oly it will still be expensive.

But then I found the new Sigma AF 10-20mm listed in Australia for AU$670 which looks a lot more promising (the Oly sale will take a big chunk out of that price).
But.. I can't find any sample shots from it and it appears that it isn't actually quite available yet.
The place I saw it for AU$670 (www.centre.net.au) tell me that if I placed an order now, it should be here by the end of May.
Although I expect the Sigma lens to be fine, I am really wary of buying anything without being able to check it out first.

So I know you are all thinking that I should just wait and see what its like when it comes out...

But... and this is quite a big "but"... One of the reasons I'm trying to buy this lens now is because I'm going on a trip up to the Kimberlies at the start of July (spectacular and remote landscapes about 3000km north of Perth). If I'm going to buy a wide-angle zoom, it would be criminal not to have it for this trip.
There seems to be quite a bit of interest in this Sigma lens on the internet, and it has been delayed for a while too.... so I expect demand will be quite high initially and it might take a while to get one in. So I feel like I shouldn't leave it until the last minute.

But I also simply can't justify the cost of the Canon. The Sigma is basically 1/2 the price of the Canon, and the fact it is slower isn't too much of a big deal for the shots I'll be taking (which will be stopped down anyway). I know Tonika and Tamron make similar lenses that start at 11 and 12mm, but I would prefer to go to 10 if I can, and from what I've seen they aren't that much cheaper than the Canon anyway. See the shot below to see just how much difference 1 or 2mm can make to the FOV at that focal length!



Also, for a couple of stunning samples of what can be done with the Canon 10-22 lens, take a look at this thread:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/223254/1

That photo of the pigeons at the bottom of the page is simply phenomonal! And the blue boathouse was taken in Perth coincidently.

And finally, the specs of the sigma lens courtesy of dpreview:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/050214...0-20dc.asp

Has anyone got any thoughts? I have no experience with Sigma lenses, so I've been basing my opinions on what I've read and the photos I've seen on the net. I'd be very interested to hear from those who own them.

Thanks
Adrian

[slejhamer]

Sigma quality has definitely improved in the past couple of years. My old 17-35mm was a nightmare, but the 18-50mm f/2.8 is a real gem. Pretty sure Rufus had a similar bad experience with the 17-35.

Are you sure that you need 10mm? That's pretty extreme. Personally I find 18mm wide enough, though I admit there have been a couple of times when 15mm would have been better (24mm equivalent in 35mm land.)

As alternatives, there's the Sigma 12-24mm which seems good, but it's big and heavy and not inexpensive ... the Canon might be a better purchase.

Tokina also has a 12-24mm lens that seems to be getting good reviews.
http://www.photo.net/equipment/tokina/12-24-f4/

Also look at the Sigma 15-30mm.

And there are primes, such as the Tokina 17mm AT-X Pro lens is very well liked and reasonably priced.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showp...=41&page=1

With all that being said, I'd probably wait to see a review and samples from the Sigma, but I'd set a cut-off date: If it's not out by June 1st, splurge on the Canon and look around your house for stuff to sell on ebay. (That's how I paid for the 50mm f/1.4. )

[Kombisaurus]

Thanks for that info Mitch

I don't think that 10mm is "too wide" at all for a DSLR with 1.6 crop factor. Certainly it won't be appropriate in a lot of situations, but thats kind of the point of it being able to zoom in to 22mm as well I guess. The most useful focal lengths will probably be around the middle of the range, but I'm sure both ends of the range will be appropriate at times (and not just for novelty shots @ 10mm).

As far as your suggestions go:

The Tokina 17mm prime is out because it isn't different enough to the 18mm I can already reach. I'm sure it gives much nicer images at 17mm than my kit lens does at 18, but if I want to improve the quality of shots I currently take with my kit lens then I think I'd sooner buy something like the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 you reviewed or the Canon 17-85 IS USM as these are much more flexible lenses that will effectively replace my kit lens. But covering the wide-angle focal length range is more important to me at the moment than improving the quality of shots I can already (or almost) get with the kit lens. Your review really has got my interest up in the Sigma 18-50 though, and I can see myself looking at this and the Canon 17-85 IS a bit more closely in the future.

The Sigma 15-30mm and 12-24mm are both in the same ballpark price range as the Canon 10-22mm... so if I'm going to spend that kind of money then I'd sooner get the Canon lens I think. With a 1.6 crop the Canon gives a similar range that the Sigma 15-30 would on a full-frame SLR.
I might consider the 12-24 if it were considerably cheaper than the Canon, but it is almost the same price, not as wide, and slower... and the Canon has a very good reputation. So even though I'm sure the 12-24 is probably an excellent lens, it isn't for me.

There is also the Tamron SP AF 11-18mm f4.5-5.6... but it retails for AU$1200 here so again I'd probably choose the Canon for the same reasons as with the Sigma 12-24.

But the Tokina 12-24 f/4 you suggested could be quite interesting and is worth a closer look It looks to be a similar price to the Sigma 10-20mm lens (ie much cheaper than the others)... so the question becomes one of image quality and focal length. I'd much prefer to have an extra 2mm at the wide end than 4mm at the long end, but I'd also prefer the lens that gives the better images. Impossible to tell until I can see some photos from the 10-20 I guess!! grrr..

I think you are right in saying it is worth waiting a bit to see some pics from the Sigma 10-20... but if it doesn't come out before, say, June 1st.. then I'd almost be more inclined to order it sight-unseen and take a bit of a risk on it being good, instead of ordering the Canon and paying double the price to ensure it will be good.

[Kombisaurus]

ooo.. and I just discovered this little bargain.. but alas I don't think I can take advantage of it living here in Aus. Even if Dell USA do ship here, by the time you add customs duty/GST it probably wouldn't be worth it (considering it would possibly no longer carry a genuine Canon warranty).
But if I in the US, I'd snap this little bargain up!

I found this thread here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.a...e=13530357

And here's the deal for the Canon EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM:

Go here: http://www.supercoupon.com/... ...id=9c92eaa1b3b37885ee13a94bdd40834156a68062

Use this coupon: 79VT3767HP833W
and this one: NWF4LF71ZKGMBK

Comes to $589.15 with free shipping. I just ordered. Now begins the waiting game to see if Dell screws me

[shuttertalk]

You're right - the Sigma 10-20 is new, so you'll be hard pressed to find a review out there...

Dell sells camera lenses? I thought they were a computer company!