Sigma 10-20 vs Tokina 11-16 for D300

All,

I'm having sellers remorse..., as I recently sold my 12-24/4 Nikkor and I'm think ing about getting another UWA lens for my D300.

I know that folks like the 10-20 from Sigma (e.g., Thom Hogan,) and the Tokina 11-16 has gotten good reviews, but I'd like to hear which people prefer now that the Tokina is available.

--
Thanks,
Mark

Already owned and sold the Sigma 10-20 - the f/3.5 was the dealbreaker for me. Picked up the tokina - and though you loose a few mm on either end (which was noticeable to me), the faster glass more than makes up for it (for my purposes). If you are shooting outside, or in good light most of the time I would recommend the sigma, otherwise the tokina. I am quite surprised by the quality (only having owned Nikon/Nikkor lenses in the past, I was worried). The only drawback is that the focus motor is a little louder than any of my other lenses....

MarkD2 said:

now that the Tokina is available.

Click to expand...

Where is it available? I've been waiting 2 months at B&H.

Im also interested, it looks like a nice lense.

...and on just about every forum in the world. I know because I've been researching both of them for the last two months.

The bottom line is that no one of the two is better than the other, just different. You will hear bad things about both and spectacular things about both. The Sigma has been around for a while (about 3 years) where as the Tokina is relatively new. I've been trying to get a copy of the Tokina for the last two months because it is unavailable everywhere except with the "Brooklyn Crooks." There were reported issues with the Sigma when it was new and there were reported issues with the Tokina in the first releases.

Overall, the Tokina is reported to be a little soft edge to edge wide open (which is expected) and has a higher occurrence of CA. It's considered a sharp lens overall. It's bigger and used to cost more (Amazon was selling the Sigma for $501. a few days ago and just raised it to $569., the same price as the Tokina). It has a pretty short range (11-16).

The Sigma is a slower lens with a longer range which handles CA better. Some reports show an inconsistency with linear distortion as opposed to the standard linear distortion that all ultra wides have. It's also considered a sharp lens overall.

I did want to try the Tokina but if I can't find one soon, I'll probably buy the Sigma. For my type of shooting I don't require a fast lens.

Good luck in your hunt...and, oh!... Tamron is announcing a new 10-24 next week!

Comes down to a simple choice really - both lenses are superb.

Do you want

A - A lighter lens - Longer zoom range - slower aperture

B - Heavier lens - shorter zoom range - faster aperture.

The other differences, are debated, sharpness claims go back and forth between them, and the CA on a d300 is less of an issue since the D300 can remove CA in camera. There is a more complex distortion in the sigma, than in the tok.

in the long run, you don't have to walk too far forward or backwards to frame what you could with 10 vs 11, the longer end is more noticable, and of course movement changes perspective. - The Tokina will also work on Full Frame cameras at 15/16mm, never tried with the sigma.
--
A poor photographer blames his tools.

I have now tried both lenses. I really wanted to like the Tokina, but I kept the Sigma. The only thing I'll miss is a fast lens. However, the Sigma is sharper in the edges. The Tokina isn't good until at f5.6, which defeated the purpose of a fast lens (AF wasn't noticeably different on my D80).

The center sharpness might go to the Tokina, but I am really hard pressed to tell. However, the Tokina seemed to have a bit better contrast. As mentioned, though, another problem with the lens is the CA.

The two problems with the Sigma is the lack of f2.8 and the funny distortion at 10 mm. I have heard that it is correctable with PTlens. Since I got the Sigma for $500 I can still buy the program and be happy.

All in all, both seem to be good lenses. Since I won't probably need f2.8 (the lens is mainly for landscapes for me), I went with the Sigma. I might post some pics later from my shoot-out.

dezignman said:

Good luck in your hunt...and, oh!... Tamron is announcing a new 10-24
next week!

Click to expand...

And here I've been agonizing over this and finally decided to go with the Sigma...

:-(

--

I have also decided to go with the Sigma. I missed out on the Amazon price of $501. which increased to $569. in just the last few days. But, after all the research, I'm opting for the longer range as I really don't need the speed with this lens. They're both good and the new Tamron will probably also be a winner also but it will be a while by the time it's released and any initial bugs are worked out.

should have it this week.