Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 vs Tokina 11-16 f/2.8

[Canon Man]

Guys, I can't decide. After trying the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-whatever, I'm convinced that I need a better quality and faster glass (all my lens are f/2.8 and faster). I also realized how great and indisposable the UWA lens are.

I know both of these are great lens and within or slighly over my budget but I can decide? I feel like I'm going with Tokina fast and constant f/2.8 and slightly lower price but then Canon would perfectly fit in my kit with its focal range aside from beaing slighly slower (I do prefere available light photography). Please help me chose. Thanks.

[venchka]

You won't like this.
Buy both. Throw away the one you hate.
Wait. Sell the one you hate.

The Tokina lens will always better than the Canon at f/2.8. At f/4.0 the Canon might start edging out the Tokina.

[Canon Man]

Originally Posted by venchka

The Tokina lens will always better than the Canon at f/2.8.

How much better?

[Canon Man]

I also saw a well used 14mm f/2.8 MKI for around $1,000. It would probably be the ultimate UWA lens for me especially for FF. Should I shell out twice as much now?

[Stargazer77517]

I have the 10-22 and love it, esp on a crop body. It has the same UD glass that is found in canons L Series. I can not be classed as an L because the L lens was primarly developed for FF cameras and the 10-22 is the EFS series which will not fit a FF.
Also, I use mine primarily for landscapes, so a large apt was not needed since I use f8-16 mostly

Canon 10-22mm Review

[stephges]

Originally Posted by Canon Man

How much better?

Tons, considering the Canon can't shoot at f/2.8 :-)

[venchka]

Originally Posted by venchka

You won't like this.
Buy both. Throw away the one you hate.
Wait. Sell the one you hate.

The Tokina lens will always better than the Canon at f/2.8. At f/4.0 the Canon might start edging out the Tokina.

Originally Posted by Canon Man

How much better?

The Canon lens doesn't do f/2.8. At all. Never. Ever. Do you need 2.8? If you do, then the Tokina wins. Can you live with f/4.5 maximum aperture?

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Canon Man

I also saw a well used 14mm f/2.8 MKI for around $1,000. It would probably be the ultimate UWA lens for me especially for FF. Should I shell out twice as much now?

With the 14mm I don't think you can use filters. Might not matter to some, but I love using ND and GND filters for landscape where water will be in the shot(creeks, waterfalls, beach, etc).

As for the f2.8, that wouldn't be a big deal to me for an UWA. Nice to have for sure, but not a deal breaker. That said, I've had the Canon 10-22 and loved it, but 90% of the time I was at 10mm when using it and I believe it's f/3.5 at 10mm.
I've never used the Tokina, it could be even better than the Canon for all I know.

[Canon Man]

Originally Posted by thejakestir

With the 14mm I don't think you can use filters. Might not matter to some, but I love using ND and GND filters for landscape where water will be in the shot(creeks, waterfalls, beach, etc).

As for the f2.8, that wouldn't be a big deal to me for an UWA. Nice to have for sure, but not a deal breaker. That said, I've had the Canon 10-22 and loved it, but 90% of the time I was at 10mm when using it and I believe it's f/3.5 at 10mm.
I've never used the Tokina, it could be even better than the Canon for all I know.

What are you using on 5D? Eventually, I will switch to one. Does 14mm MKII use filters?

For now, I sill can't decide, Canon for $650 or Tokina for $525?

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Canon Man

What are you using on 5D? Eventually, I will switch to one. Does 14mm MKII use filters?

For now, I sill can't decide, Canon for $650 or Tokina for $525?

I'm using the 16-35 mkll on the 5d2.
The front element on the 14mm (both versions) is rounded so it can't take front filters, but it may have some kind of rear filter holder, not sure though.

BTW, if you buy used you can sell it for about what you paid when you move up to full frame.

[venchka]

EF-S vs. Full Frame lenses is a consideration. Buy EF lens once. Buy EF-S lens. Buy EF lens. Pay me now AND pay me later. Something to think about. BUT. You won't get the FOV from the EF lens that you get from the EF-S lens. Bummer.

[shnitz]

As I said in another thread, it isn't worth the size and price difference for EF lenses if you aren't shooting fullframe. Plus, there's no EF lens that is ultrawide on digital. The Tokina, as mentioned, is 2.8 but 11-16mm sometimes feels like it's hardly a zoom. The Canon has a more solid range but it's slower. Both are solid lenses. Choose which features and price are best for you. If I were in your shoes, I'd prefer the greater zoom range, as fast shutter speeds aren't as important with wide angle lenses.

[Canon Man]

Originally Posted by shnitz

As I said in another thread, it isn't worth the size and price difference for EF lenses if you aren't shooting fullframe. Plus, there's no EF lens that is ultrawide on digital. The Tokina, as mentioned, is 2.8 but 11-16mm sometimes feels like it's hardly a zoom. The Canon has a more solid range but it's slower. Both are solid lenses. Choose which features and price are best for you. If I were in your shoes, I'd prefer the greater zoom range, as fast shutter speeds aren't as important with wide angle lenses.

it's just an opinion. I hardly understand what you mean. I'm not looking neither for a zoom, nor for a FF lens at this point, just a good UWA lens.