Wide Angle Lens - Sigma or Tokina

[fotugraphy]

Hello,
I have Sony A57 and wanted to buy a sharp wide angle lens. Budget is around approx 500 USD.

I have short listed.
Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 & Tokina 11-16 F2.8

Expectations from the lens:
1. Sharp.
2. I take a lot of sun shots (bright or evening). I need less sun flares.

Please suggest me which lens should i buy or any other lens which fits in my budget?

Thank you

[Polar01]

Raj: I have that Sigma lens, have not had any problems with it, I usually shot low with a tripod as I will often stitch 2 to 3 shots together. As for lens flare if you get the sun in the image or close you get flare no matter what the lens, trick it where you place the flare to clone or heal it out.

Cheers:

Allan

[Donald]

Raj

I am unable to make a comparison between the lenses as I have not used both. I own the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 and consider it an excellent lens. Chromatic Aberration is a known issue, but on the basis that you know about it when buying, then you can manage it.

[fotugraphy]

Raj: I have that Sigma lens, have had not problems with is, I usually shot low with a tripod as I will often stitch 2 to 3 shots together. As for lens flare if you get the sun in the image or close you get flare no matter what the lens, trick it where you place the flare to clone or heal it out.

Cheers:

Allan

Thanks a lot for the Suggestion. Can you please provide more information on the sharpness of sigma? I got very mixed reviews for both lenses. M totally confused.

[Donald]

Thanks a lot for the Suggestion. Can you please provide more information on the sharpness of sigma? I got very mixed reviews for both lenses. M totally confused.

Raj - Please do not get too caught up with all the reviews that will tell you that one lens is marginally better than the other. The fact is that neither Sigma nor Tokina would remain in business of they made bad lenses. You could spend a lifetime reading reviews that told you one was better than the other.

In real world terms and at the end of the day, either lens will help you produce images of very high quality.

[fotugraphy]

Raj

I am unable to make a comparison between the lenses as I have not used both. I own the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 and consider it an excellent lens. Chromatic Aberration is a known issue, but on the basis that you know about it when buying, then you can manage it.

Thanks a lot for your kind suggestion. I shoot in raw, so CA not a big concern. I heard good review about sharpness.

[fotugraphy]

Raj - Please do not get too caught up with all the reviews that will tell you that one lens is marginally better than the other. The fact is that neither Sigma nor Tokina would remain in business of they made bad lenses. You could spend a lifetime reading reviews that told you one was better than the other.

In real world terms and at the end of the day, either lens will help you produce images of very high quality.

Once again thanks a lot for the valuable suggestion. I think I got my answer with it.

[shreds]

Like Donald, I have not used either, but do consider whether the f2.8 will be of any use to you in your photography? Personally, with no other information I would have leant towards the f2.8 lens, but I know of plenty of satisfied photographers with the Sigma which has been tried and tested over the years.

Flare will be a problem with any wide angle lens no matter how good it is. Either avoid being at the wrong angle to the sun/light source or make a feature of it in the shot.

[Polar01]

Raj: you asked for more info on sharpness well here it is, "Damn that is sharp", 3 shots stitched together, f/4 at 6 minutes per image, oh ya camera was on a tripod.



Cheers:

Allan

[pnodrog]

DX0 Mark Gives the Tokina a slight edge in performance over the Sigma when used on a Nikon D7000 (they have not both been tested on your Sony). I have an old Sigma 15-30 which I am still very happy with but I do have to take a bit of care with flare but as Alan said it is there to some extent regardless of the lens. As much as I like my Sigma I would be tempted to go for the Tokina, not for the very marginal edge in performance but rather that I would opt for the additional speed in preference to a wider zoom range.

[fotugraphy]

Like Donald, I have not used either, but do consider whether the f2.8 will be of any use to you in your photography? Personally, with no other information I would have leant towards the f2.8 lens, but I know of plenty of satisfied photographers with the Sigma which has been tried and tested over the years.

Flare will be a problem with any wide angle lens no matter how good it is. Either avoid being at the wrong angle to the sun/light source or make a feature of it in the shot.

Thank you for ur kind suggestion. F2.8 is not that much needed as I do architectures and that too on tripod. My confusion is over now in terms of sharpness n lens flare.

[fotugraphy]

Raj: you asked for more info on sharpness well here it is, "Damn that is sharp", 3 shots stitched together, f/4 at 6 minutes per image, oh ya camera was on a tripod.



Cheers:

Allan

Wow. Thanks for sharing the image n helping me. It is indeed full of details which expect frm my new lens.

[fotugraphy]

DX0 Mark Gives the Tokina a slight edge in performance over the Sigma when used on a Nikon D7000 (they have not both been tested on your Sony). I have an old Sigma 15-30 which I am still very happy with but I do have to take a bit of care with flare but as Alan said it is there to some extent regardless of the lens. As much as I like my Sigma I would be tempted to go for the Tokina, not for the very marginal edge in performance but rather that I would opt for the additional speed in preference to a wider zoom range.

Thanks a lot for sharing such valuable info. now I have no confusions at all.

[John 2]

My current post "Waiting" was made with the Tokina if you want to check quality. I love the lens and it is sharp to my eye but I can't compare it with the Sigma of which I have no experience. You may not always need the wider aperture in your work but on the odd occasion that you do, it will be there with the Tokina.

Waiting.

[fotugraphy]

Thanks a lot everyone for providing such valuable suggestions and information and helped me out to take the decision easily.

I think I should go for sigma 10-20mm only because of wider zoom range which I really need. I dont really need f2.8 as I shoot architects and will b shooting landscapes in near future and that too on tripod.

(As suggested they match marginal in terms of sharpness n flares so I dont have to worry abt that now).

Once again thanks a lot everybody.

[fotugraphy]

My curret post "Waiting" was made with the Tokina if you want to check quality. I love the lens and it is sharp to my eye but I can't compare it with the Sigma of which I have no experience. You may not always need the wider aperture in your work but on the odd occasion that you do, it will be there with the Tokina.

Waiting.

Thanks a lot for ur valuable input and sharing the image. I will consider it a tack sharp image with all the details which I expect from a lens.

In my type of photography I have never used aperture wide open. But sometimes 2-4mm mattered me a lot. So only due to wide zoom range, I may opt for sigma.

[fotugraphy]

Sigma was not available for Sony mounts anywhere in my city i.e New Delhi. So, I bought Tokina 11-16 F2.8 lens.

Once again thanks a lot everyone for helping me to make a good decision.

[shreds]

Irony!!

Nevertheless, I am sure you will not be disappointed.

I know what you mean about the odd mm or so, but my favourite and nowadays most frequently used lens for architectural shots is the (of no use to you unfortunately), Nikon 14-24mm. I chose this for primarily IQ reasons, which is usually my first starting point and is so much better than the cheaper but marginally wider 12-24mm. In practice it really has not made a lot of difference. I am sure you will find the same.

[fotugraphy]

Irony!!

Nevertheless, I am sure you will not be disappointed.

I know what you mean about the odd mm or so, but my favourite and nowadays most frequently used lens for architectural shots is the (of no use to you unfortunately), Nikon 14-24mm. I chose this for primarily IQ reasons, which is usually my first starting point and is so much better than the cheaper but marginally wider 12-24mm. In practice it really has not made a lot of difference. I am sure you will find the same.

I called approx 20-25 stores. None of them have Sigma 10-20mm for Sony Mounts and only 2 stores had Tokina. So, i opted for it. I think i should not worry about odd mm now because i got the lens now and m counting on your experience that odd mm will not matter much. Thanks a tonn.

[shreds]

You might find that using software such a DxO Optics View Point 2 to correct any distortions will pay dividends in the pp when using an ultra wide angle lens, unless you already have a suitable editor that does this?