View Single Post
04-09-10, 05:59 AM
Join Date: Jul 2009
There is little difference between the Canon 10-22mm and Sigma 10-20mm. The biggest difference is price. There are even two options with the Sigma 10-20mm, the cheapest is the f/4-5.6 and the f/3.5 is more expensive. Frankly there is little point in the f/3.5 lens - the wider aperture usually means a shallower depth of field (but depth of field is enormous the wider the field of view - you won't get shallow depth of field at 10mm) or more light gathering (the f/3.5 doesn't give you much more and who cares? You're using a tripod for landscapes most of the time).
Mark (Cutter) did buy a Canon 10-22mm lens recently and I know he's impressed with it but, from all the comparisons I've seen, there's nothing that would make me spend more than the cost of the cheaptest Sigma 10-20mm.
View Forum Profile
Send a private message to chris-p
Find all posts by chris-p