|
Lens quandry: Sigma 10-20 vs. Canon 10-22
I'm thinking seriously about getting a wide-angle zoom for my Rebel XT. I've currently got the 18-55mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 kit lens, and the "nifty fifty" 50mm ƒ/1.8. I would like something wider angle, mainly for automotive photography, especially in-car, although I'd probably use it a lot for just walking around. So, I'm considering the Sigma 10-20mm ƒ/4-5.6 and Canon 10-22mm ƒ/3.5-4.5.
I've spent quite a few hours over the last couple of days reading reviews, looking at pictures on Flickr, and even holding both lenses in person, but I haven't taken any pictures yet. The Canon's about $200 more than the Sigma, and doesn't come with a lens hood (another $30 or so). In general, the two lenses seem very well matched. Some reviews claim the Sigma's as sharp as, or sharper than, the Canon, while others say the opposite. In the pictures I've seen on Flickr, it seems to me that the ones from the Canon are noticeably sharper, however (but I'm not done looking). The additional 1/3rd ƒ-stop (?) doesn't sound like a whole lot, but I don't yet have a flash (other than on-board) and I feel like I always want my kit lens to be faster and give me more shallow DoF. The Canon seems to be more resistant to flare. The Sigma seems to be a *very* well-built lens, but their quality control/consistency seem to leave something to be desired.
I don't like to spend more money on something than necessary, but I've also got this thing about buying "the best". I'm trying to be a little smarter here, however, and not spend money on a difference I won't likely see. In the year that I've been shooting with this camera, I've printed out a *very* small number of prints, and I don't really see going larger than 8x10 (mainly because I don't have a printer bigger than that!).
So, I guess I'm looking to hear from anyone who's made the same decision or had any experience with either lens!
|
