For the past few days, I thought I had settled on the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Ultrawide Angle Lens. It seems pretty awesome, but I think I changed my mind.
From what I am reading, people generally love the Tokina lens. It takes really nice pictures, takes great video and generally opens up a whole new world of photography and videography to those who currently have the kit 18-55mm or 18-135mm lenses. But don’t take my word for it…
“It’s got great optical quality, and with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 it’s faster than competing wide-angle lenses.”
“Well to wrap it up, the Tokina is quite a lens. Couple that to a savings of about $250.00 and it is a no brainer.”
“This is one of the first wide angle lenses I ever bought and it’s probably the most exciting lens out there.”
I mean, it’s hard to argue with all the good reviews. But there are some things that concern me. People are saying that the Tokina, when compared to the similar Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 lens, has less of an effective focal range. They are also saying that the Tokina doesn’t offer as much distortion when down in the really wide angle range. Something the Canon does. That’s important when you want to get creative.
Lastly, the Canon has a variable aperture while the Tokina has a fixed aperture. While the Tokina’s f/2.8 aperture may be preferable to some, I think I’m leaning towards the variable.
There’s also the Sigma 10-20mm, but from what I’m reading, it’s a darker lens that isn’t great indoors. People say things like, “You don’t use wide angle lenses indoors anyway.” Really? Interesting.