Sigma 10-20 F3.5 VS Tokina 11-20 F2.8

NikonsandVstroms

I currently have a Tokina 12-24 F4 but I need something slightly wider for a specific client's work (event planner and she wants the whole room in one shot). Just on the basic specs it's a toss up, the Sigma's wider FOV would be nice, but the Tokina's brighter aperture would let me take photos of more venues by hand since every 1/3 of a stop matters at that point and the freedom of shooting quickly by hand VS a tripod can help especially if I only have a minute or 2 to cover it with the room cleared.

So what I'm looking for is if anyone has some experience with these lenses and knows of any pro's/con's that would possibly tip the balance.

Brett1000

NikonsandVstroms wrote: »

I currently have a Tokina 12-24 F4 but I need something slightly wider for a specific client's work (event planner and she wants the whole room in one shot). Just on the basic specs it's a toss up, the Sigma's wider FOV would be nice, but the Tokina's brighter aperture would let me take photos of more venues by hand since every 1/3 of a stop matters at that point and the freedom of shooting quickly by hand VS a tripod can help especially if I only have a minute or 2 to cover it with the room cleared.

So what I'm looking for is if anyone has some experience with these lenses and knows of any pro's/con's that would possibly tip the balance.

I've had some experience with the Sigma 10-20, it's not as sharp as the cheap Canon 10-18

NikonsandVstroms

Brett1000 wrote: »

I've had some experience with the Sigma 10-20, it's not as sharp as the cheap Canon 10-18

Just to double check were you using the older F4-5.6 or the new F3.5?

Grainbelt

I had the older Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 so this may not translate directly, but the distortion at 10-11mm was so severe that it wasn't particularly useful until 12mm.

Perhaps I had a bad copy, but if you're looking for adequate performance, indoors, at 10-11mm, be sure the updated model is better corrected or can be auto-corrected at time of conversion.

Matthew Saville

I've tested both the new 10-20 3.5 and the new 11-20 2.8. (In addition to the original 10-20 4.5-5.6 and the 11-16 2.8)

Hands-down, get the 11-20 2.8. It's just that sharp. Wide open at 2.8 it's amazingly perfect well past the rule-of-thirds area, and stopped down it's flawlessly sharp right up to the very corners. It's only got a slight bit of sharpness drop-off in the extreme, extreme edges, which unfortunately doesn't go away even when stopped down, but really it's only the last few pixels; they almost always get cropped out when I'm leveling a horizon. Anyways, Get the 11-20.

Here's my review: https://www.slrlounge.com/tokina-11-20mm-f2-8-dx-review/

NikonsandVstroms

Matthew Saville wrote: »

I've tested both the new 10-20 3.5 and the new 11-20 2.8. (In addition to the original 10-20 4.5-5.6 and the 11-16 2.8)

Hands-down, get the 11-20 2.8. It's just that sharp. Wide open at 2.8 it's amazingly perfect well past the rule-of-thirds area, and stopped down it's flawlessly sharp right up to the very corners. It's only got a slight bit of sharpness drop-off in the extreme, extreme edges, which unfortunately doesn't go away even when stopped down, but really it's only the last few pixels; they almost always get cropped out when I'm leveling a horizon. Anyways, Get the 11-20.

Here's my review: https://www.slrlounge.com/tokina-11-20mm-f2-8-dx-review/

11-20 it is!