Canon vs Tokina Ultrawides Help

[AdrianAllen]

Hi guys! I'm on the market for an UWA lens, i've come across 2 lenses that i'm interested in.

Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 ver2 (Can be bought 2nd hand at around 320euros)
vs
Canon 10-18mm 4.5-5.6 stm is ( Brand new around 200euros )
Going to be mounted on a 70d.

my question is, will the canon be better with the IS compared to the tokina with the 2.8/f. I will be using the lens mainly for portraits/landscapes/street and will be doing zero to little videos. Bokeh is a plus, I guess.

Thanks in advance for the help!

 

[tpatana]

That Tokina is aweseome. I haven't used that Canon one, but I doubt it can deliver even close to same quality.

 

[tpatana]

This was taken ages ago with the Tokina Mk1 and Canon Rebel XTi.

 

[pwp]

There's a LOT of info comparing these two wide zooms including right her on CR:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18278.0
http://canon5dtips.com/lenses/tokina-11-16-vs-canon-10-22/
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1581573
https://www.flickr.com/groups/efs1022/discuss/72157611525406280/
http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/forum/digital-photography-equipment-and-gear/other-digital-photography-gear/205566-advice-tokina-11-16-vs-canon-10-22
...and so on.

Just do a search using Canon 10-22 vs Tokina 11-16 and read up.

-pw

 

[DavidAutumns]

Hi get the 10-18 it's a steal. I have had great fun with this lens all year.

from the Canon 100D

Don't let on to Canon this is their very best value lens

Dave

 

[Djaaf]

The Tokina is quite good, with low coma for really nice Nightscapes or Milky Way shots.
It's built like a tank and very reliable.
The only issue I had with it is that it was shortsighted on my 60D.

Autofocus is slow and noisy, too, compared to more modern offerings.

In that UWA for APS-C category, you may also want to look at the Sigma 10-20. It's cheap and not too bad ( a bit of field curvature that can be a pain sometimes...)

As usual when comparing a f/2.8 to an f/3.5-5.6 of comparable optical quality the only real question is : Do you need f/2.8 ?

Djaaf.

 

[AdrianAllen]

That Tokina is aweseome. I haven't used that Canon one, but I doubt it can deliver even close to same quality.

Build quality, yes, but on the image quality side, they say, unless you pixel peep, you really can't see the difference.

There's a LOT of info comparing these two wide zooms including right her on CR:

Just do a search using Canon 10-22 vs Tokina 11-16 and read up.

-pw

Actually its the 10-18mm i'm loooking at, and yes I have searched for comparisons of those lenses.

The Tokina is quite good, with low coma for really nice Nightscapes or Milky Way shots.
It's built like a tank and very reliable.
The only issue I had with it is that it was shortsighted on my 60D.

Autofocus is slow and noisy, too, compared to more modern offerings.

In that UWA for APS-C category, you may also want to look at the Sigma 10-20. It's cheap and not too bad ( a bit of field curvature that can be a pain sometimes...)

As usual when comparing a f/2.8 to an f/3.5-5.6 of comparable optical quality the only real question is : Do you need f/2.8 ?

Djaaf.

I already know that they have little difference regarding the IQ of the pics taken, but I really want to know is, Can the Canon compensate with the speed with just the IS compared to the 2.8 of the Tokina. Like handheld shooting in low to adequate lighting, something like that. thanks again!

 

[Don Haines]

There is a lot to be said for f2.8 in low light......

 

[tpatana]

When I compared UWAs for crop, good thing was that there weren't really any bad choices. For me what brought me in Tokina was the 2.8 and also it had good reviews on corner sharpness compared to the other models.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Tokina has historically done a very good job with wide angle lenses, so I would not be afraid of it. I have a Tokina 17mm f/3.5 lens that I preferred to my 17-40mm L, so I sold it and kept the Tokina. Its my only non Canon lens.

 

[Don Haines]

30 second exposure, Tokina 11-16 at 11mm and F2.8.... sometimes you need all the light you can get...

and yes, I have the 10-20.......at home.... in a box....


if you are interested in "portraits/landscapes/street ", the 11-16 might be a bit wide for you..... Personally, I prefer the 17-55F2.8 for that......

 

[AdrianAllen]

30 second exposure, Tokina 11-16 at 11mm and F2.8.... sometimes you need all the light you can get...

and yes, I have the 10-20.......at home.... in a box....


if you are interested in "portraits/landscapes/street ", the 11-16 might be a bit wide for you..... Personally, I prefer the 17-55F2.8 for that......

10-20? you mean the 10-22mm from canon? but isn't the 10-18mm having the better reviews from the two?

Oh and by the way, i'm only shooting in Crop( 70D ) so the range is actually a bit fine. Right?? sorry still a newbie.

 

[Don Haines]

30 second exposure, Tokina 11-16 at 11mm and F2.8.... sometimes you need all the light you can get...

and yes, I have the 10-20.......at home.... in a box....


if you are interested in "portraits/landscapes/street ", the 11-16 might be a bit wide for you..... Personally, I prefer the 17-55F2.8 for that......

10-20? you mean the 10-22mm from canon? but isn't the 10-18mm having the better reviews from the two?

Oh and by the way, i'm only shooting in Crop( 70D ) so the range is actually a bit fine. Right?? sorry still a newbie.

OOPS! I meant 10-22.... good catch!

I've never used the 10-18 so I can't say anything about it.....

BTW, have you ever played around with stitching images together to get a wider field of view? I do that all the time when my lens isn't wide enough....