I've tried to do a couple of searches here but it usually leads to someone posting a link from ken rockwell and then everyone going off on ken rockwell.

The 3 lenses I was looking it was the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (which seems to be in backorder everywhere) the sigma 10-22mm, and the nikon 12-24mm f/4.

The nikon is overpriced (I'm a longtime canon shooter switching over, and the 10-22mm was my bread and butter), but I've heard good things about the 11-16mm f/2.8, and it's affordable and its nice to have that extra stop of light when your at the widest range. I havn't read much about the sigma though.

What have people have the best experience with?

I've just got to Sigma 10-20 and so far it seems pretty decent. Nice Sigma EX build quality and nice and sharp. I also used to have the Sigma 12-24 and I really liked that too, but swapped for the 10-20 as it can take filters.

Personally I rarely shoot wider than f/8 on my wide angles so the f/2.8 of the Tokina doesn't appeal to me.

It may help to know what body you are using.

d300. It's the reason why im not considering the 14-24mm.

For the D300 I'd say its the Nikon 12-24.

You can get them used in absolute mint condition for $600 and on a DX body its absolutely amazing, especially the 18-24 range of it.

I have the Tokina 12-24 which I find to be a nice lens for the money. I know its not on your list but it works well.

There is a nice comparison of the WA zooms on the nikonians site that you might want to take a look at, especially if you plan to use the lens a lot. IIRC, it compares the sigma, nikon and tokina zooms. Sorry, I don't have a link.

I have and like the sigma 10-20, but I'm not much of a WA shooter.

Thom Hogan (www.bythom.com) recommends the sigma 10-20. And dont worry, people wont go crazy and attack his reviews.

I had the Tokina and it is spectacular, I only sold it because I went to full-frame:





I didn't really know what I was doing at all back then, not that I do now either.

if you ever plan to go full frame in the future, you may as well get the 14-24mm.. Used, they are going pretty cheap because many people bought it new, figured out that they never use it or its too big, and want to dump it

I see them on craigslist as low as $1100 or even less...

works great on crop sensor:

Examples w/D40:

Nice shots TWoK!

@ OP, remember when you need f/2.8, nothing else you're considering will get you there.

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/pho/984315425.html

this just came up on craigslist.

I have got both the tokina 12-24 and sigma 10-20, quite like the sigma if not for the irriating peeling of coating problems.

got the tamron 11-18 and 10-22 for canon as well. the 10-22 is probly still the best UWA cropped lens ever.

However most of my UWA shots are now done with 16-35L on 5D I/II

If I were shooting crop Canon, the 10-22 is best IMO, but only if you don't need the extra F-stops. If that were the case, the Tokina 11-16 would be my choice. I had the 11-16 Tokina for the first few months it was out and loved it. Sharp, accurate focus even in lower light and solid as a rock.

If I were shooting Nikon the 14-24 on FF and the Tokina 11-16 on a crop are the best options IMO.

Nothing Canon makes even approaches the 14-24. Nothing anyone makes for that matter.

ATL Jack wrote:
Thom Hogan (www.bythom.com) recommends the sigma 10-20. And dont worry, people wont go crazy and attack his reviews.




Thom's also gone back to using the Nikon 12-24...

Ths Sigma is pretty good, but the Nikon is better (I've owned both).

Best optical quality and resistance to flare (main difference) -> Nikkor 12-24
Normal UWA high quality at a reasonable price -> Tokina 12-24 (my personal choice)
Real UWA -> Sigma 10-20 (I have seen a LOT of very convincing pictures but the Sigma grey finishing is really not my favorite - peeling off and not scratch resistent)
Need for speed (2.8) -> Tokina 11-16
I don't know about the new Tamron, but some people seem to like it...

Guy

I've seen a lot of great stuff said about the Tokina 11-16, that it rivals the Nikon for overall sharpness. Seems like the problems I've seen mentioned about it had to do with the early Canon versions. Here's a good resource:
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/

I love the Tokina 12-24, although its only 18mm FF equivalent, which is wide not ultra wide. The Sigma 10-20 is loved by many, but I just didn't like the look or feel of it, and I need 20-24 more than 10-12.

Ken Rockwell (go ahead and laugh) has an interesting comparison on 4 WA/UWA lenses. You can read it (with a grain of salt) here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm

F MY LIFE, The 11-16 was in stock at bhphoto this morning. I had to go to work, I come back and its out of stock =(

It's ok. The world isn't over. Check craigslist and the B&S forum.