Which 10-20mm zoom for Canon APS-C?

Hello,

I wonder what thinking about these wide-angles (for landscape):
- CANON 10-22 mm EF-S F3.5-4.5 USM
VS.
- SIGMA 10-20 mm F3,5 DC EX HSM Canon

From Photozone, they are both very close from each other, with a little global advantage for the Sigma. For owners, could you please comment this "contest"!
Thank you very much,

David

I have the Sigma 10-20 lens and image quality is superb.
Here's a link to the comparison test that sold me.
Comparable image quality and the Sigma costs $300 less than the Canon.
To top it off, Sigma includes an excellent case and a lens hood, which Canon fails to include with their overpriced lens. The choice is obvious IMO.

I agree with John. I've had the Sigma for over 4 years now and until I go FF, it will be my wide angle lens of choice - a great little piece of glass.

Thanks to both of you for this comments.
Do you use these lenses with filters? I'm using my 18-55 with GND. Are they useful with this one? and if it is, which one do you use ? Cokin P series does not fit to these wide-angle lenses.

I have the Sigma 10-20. Reviews I have read say the Canon 10-22 is a tad sharper. However, I am very very pleased with the Sigma, and it is significantly cheaper. You can't go wrong either way.

Oh, and with the GND, forget about using the Cokin P holder at the 10 mm end (for the Sigma at least), because you get terrible vignetting. You would have to handhold the filter. Be careful with using a polarizer with any ultra-wide angle in horizontal format, as you will get uneven polarization of skies.

Yes Doug, I know the P series is not made for 10mm (nor 16 as it's an APS-C). What's why I request which filters type we can use on it.
Thank you for your comment

If you are buying new, the Sigma is a reasonable choice. You are just as likely to get a bad copy as a good one, given Sigma's QC at the factory. However, their Long Island service facility is fast, accommodating and known for the quality of their work. I had a bad 10-20 for Nikon. It had centering issues where one side of the image was smeary looking compared to the other. It was as if you took a picture of a flat textured surface (like a brick wall) and angled the lens in such a way as to introduce depth of field issues, but you were actually dead square to the wall. I sent it off to them, got it back in 10 days, and it was IMHO much better than the ones you see tested. It blows away the other lenses in this category.

I use mine with a Hoya Pro1D 77mm. It is a very thin filter and there are no vignetting issues. I cannot speak to the other filters you mentioned.

I bought the Canon 10-22 almost 3 years ago now, its my favorite landscape lens for sure, I have Singh Ray LB polarizer for it as well as the Singh Ray Blue-n-Gold polarizer. I also hand hold my GND's because as stated the Cokin holder will actually show in frame at 10mm. You cant go wrong with the price on the Sigma though, I have a friend who has one and its a great lens as well.

Handholding on low shutter speed would be quite difficult... Perhaps I would have to do a filter holder myself from a Cokin adaptator ring...
As extending up and bottom of the ring and maintaining the filters with little tongs...
Anyway thank you very much for sharing your thoughts about these lenses

Oh Oh... Just looked at the lenses, and I see there is a SIGMA 10-20 mm F3,5 DC EX HSM Canon (82mm filter thread), and a SIGMA 10-20 mm F4-5.6 DC EX HSM Canon (77mm filter thread).
Which one are you talking about?
Which one choosing?

I believe that folks here are referring to the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 lens, David.

Thank you very much for your help and thoughts about it.
So, I will consider about buying the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 lens ;)

I went through the same selection process about a year ago and finally bought a Canon 10-22mm used from another NPN member at a good price and love it. I use a Cokin Z holder and ND/GNDs. I took out some of the spacers on the holder and that along with some post-processing eliminates any vignetting issues--Larry

You might also consider the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. Its a faster lens and I've heard from multiple sources that it is a sharper lens than the Canon 10-22mm especially around the edges where the Canon can get very soft (I have the Canon and it is definitely soft around the edges). The one downfall is the limited zoom range but I think they limited the zoom to make for better image quality, I almost wish they made it a prime. If you already have a lens starting at 17 or 18mm then it ending at 16mm shouldn't be an issue, sure it doesn't go down to 10mm but what difference does 10 or 11mm really make? Just thought I'd throw another option out there for you.

Thanks Austin for having introduced this Tokina lens in the contest. Reviews are really good (photozone.de) and it looks like it provides a better image quality than Canon and Sigma one (a bit more chromatic aberration, anyway nothing bad, and quite better sharpness and vignetting).
But it's 150 euros more expensive than Sigma one... Definitely I have to look at it... Would have to wait one more month to buy it
Thanks Austin

I looked at the Tokina too but gave up on it as it was notoriously hard to get one then. Don't know if that has changed. I am very happy with the Canon though and find it very sharp, especially when I combinie multiple images to maximize depth of field.

Currently available in some shops in France...

David, have you already purchased a lens? If not, now that the Sigma 8-16 is available it would be my first choice. Having used the original Sigma 10-20 for several years I wouldn't hesitate at spending money with them again. The offer a good initial price, 4 yr warranty (USA), and the lens comes with a hood and case at no extra cost.