The Need To Go Wider

Coming from an opinion that does not know anything about the lenses other than what I see on paper, the single unit between 10mm and 11mm may matter more than you would think. Once you go that wide, a small value becomes an exponential jump by comparison to telephoto. In addition to being wider and longer, the 10-24 has a lower aperture and is notably more expensive. The extra expense likely comes from a build quality difference noting 1st party/3rd party. Neither of these can be used with full frame cameras so that obviously isn't a factor.

I don't know enough about either lens to really sway one way or the other. Knowledge about distortion, vignetting, and other IQ factors would probably guide my personal decision.
 
I just got the canon version of the ultra wide angle, a 10-22mm 3.5-5.6(?) and I can honestly say I absolutely love the ultra wides!

While doing the research I was faced with a similar issue in choice; tokina vs the canon. Although the Tokina had great reviews across the board the few additional mm of range at either end swayed me towards the canon. On a couple of sites the tokina rated better then the similar nikon lens and I believe cheaper as well. The 2.8 aperture really made it a hard choice for me as I like to do a lot of low light shooting.

Lol, I guess in the end I'm not helping much but you might try renting them first to see if you like one over the other?
 
Not sure if it helps? But Amazon has an additional 10% off on Sigma lens with code SIGMAO9A. If this is an option that is
 
I'm a big fan of the Tokina 12-24 and the 11-16 is supposed to be an upgrade. I'd have no hesitation going that route.
 
Back
Top