Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Looking for a wideangle: Canon or Sigma?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    How about a Frish Eye?
    My photos on J.net

    Comment


    • #17
      Hmmm, never thought about a fisheye. Simply because I never had the urgent need of one. Let's see some reviews ....
      My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

      Comment


      • #18
        I don't think you would really want a fish eye if you can get away with not having one. Why would you want to put up with the distortion when you don't have to worry about it so much.
        Tanner Johnson - Owner
        twenty53 Photography

        Comment


        • #19
          Fish eyes really don't do it for me apart from maybe what i'd describe as one off novelty shots. There is distortion with the 10-22 though but nothing out of the ordinary.
          I really never thought i'd grow to like my 10-22 so much. It spends way more time on my camera than my 17-40 and 24-105. Infact the 17-40 is pretty much redundant now but i'm keeping it in case I upgrade to a 1d as the 10-22 is only ef-s and wont fit a 1d.

          Comment


          • #20
            Just for future reference, if anyone is going to be in the market for a new lens ....


            Gerardo
            still not sure, what to get ... Sigma in the lead as for now
            My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

            Comment


            • #21
              I would not be too hasty to discount the Sigma 10-20.

              My housemate owns one and while he uses it on a D200 the quality is fantastic. It easily matches anything that i have shot on a 400d and borrowed 10-22.

              that said when i buy an ultra wide for my 400D i think i shall be going for a 10-22 most likely. For me i just really want to own the canon version as it feels nicer in the hands. Quality wise there is no real difference.

              Chris
              Chris Sharps
              5D3 | 5D2 | 7D | 1D2 | 10D | 400D | 1V | 3
              17-40F4L | 24-105F4LIS | 70-200F2.8LIS | 100-400LIS
              24F1.4L II | 50F1.2L | 85F1.2L II | 15F2.8 Fisheye | 50F1.4 | 100F2.8 Macro
              1.4x | 550EX x2

              Fuji X100

              Comment


              • #22
                I appreciate that link for comparisons, my Sigma 18-50 will show up tomorrow and he had some high praise for that up against the Canon 17-40L


                Also gave the Bigma a nice recommendation!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Let me throw in another vote for the Canon 10-22. I fought the same fight between the Sigma and the Canon, eventually and commited myself to the extrabucks for the Canon and never regreted it. Supersharp right to the very edge of the pictures, solid-built (even though plastic) and qualitywise definitely as good as my 17-40L. I am sure youd wouldn't regret it.

                  Cheers,
                  Mike


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    G'day Gerado
                    Another 10-22.
                    The glass quality is top notch abd the build although not as tough as an L series lens is good.
                    Image quality just great and just as good as my 17-40 but not quite up to the 16-35.
                    Great lens.

                    Dazz

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I see, the Canon lense is winning this poll here. Now let me ask my private Chief Finance Officer at home ...
                      My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I went and bought the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 and used it last friday. I must say I was really happy with it except the opposite forcus ring.



                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X