Trying to decide if the Canon 10-22mm is worth the $200 premium ($479 vs. $649+$33 for the hood) over the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6. It looks like I gain a third-stop on the wide end and 2/3 of a stop on the long end... neither of which is terribly important to me.
The current lens lineup is 17-55/2.8IS, 70-200/2.8L IS, 24/1.8 (Sigma), 50/1.4 (Canon), 85/1.8.
I have no real problem with Sigma lenses, so the brand isn't terribly important to me... I just want to know if I'm missing something here. The lens will be used on a 7D and it'll be used about 60/40 still/video.
I'm not hot on the Tokina 11-16mm due to the limited zoom range and flare problems.
I'd honestly prefer a bit of overlap. It helps with not having to change lenses all the time. And while I agree the 11-16 was very sharp, both it and the 12-24 are terrible with flare... and since you can't do a lot of post-processing on video, I'd prefer a lens that wasn't prone to flaring badly.
Its better corrected , handles flare very well and while it costs more now will hold its value very well indeed.
If your prices are correct then it looks like sigma want to much for it. I thought they were knocking the old variable fstop lens out cheap and selling the constant 3.5 a little bit under the canon
