# Sigma 8-16mm vs Tokina 11-16mm



## AKCalixto (Feb 27, 2012)

I am looking for a wide angle lens and I am considering to buy one of two lenses below:

Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Ultra-Wide Zoom

OR

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX Autofocus Lens

Does anyone have a suggestion? Any technical comparison? Which one has the best IQ?

They are about the same price, around $700. Sigma is wider but Tokina has f/2.8. I also noticed that Tokina has announced the version II of its lens (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=1855).

Thanks


----------



## lecoupdejarnac (Feb 27, 2012)

I have the Tokina and it's a great lens. I've heard great things about this Sigma too, and if I weren't about to go fullframe, I would be getting the Sigma as well.

Fortunately, the Tokina works on FF at 14.5mm-16mm. So, if you think you might someday go FF, go for the Tokina. Otherwise I'd probably go for the Sigma, the wider aperture of the Tokina usually isn't used that much on such an ultra-wide-angle.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 27, 2012)

I'm also a Tokina owner and have been pleased with the lens. The new version won't be out until summer in a Canon mount, so you need to take that into consideration if you want to wait. I'm not sure it's worth waiting for though, as the current model is very good.

It seems as though owners of all three of the ultra-wide APS-C lenses like them: the Tokina, the Sigma and the Canon 10-22mm. I chose the Tokina because of the speed, but I would agree that the faster lens isn't usually that important with wide-angles. Still, there have been times when it was nice to have. I've also been very impressed with the build-quality of the Tokina. They give it a "pro" designation, which is probably nothing more than a marketing gimmick, but it does seem to be very well constructed.

From what I've read, this is one of the those rare cases when you can't go wrong with any of the choices.


----------



## 00Q (Feb 27, 2012)

I have the Sigma 8-16. It deserves the rave reviews it has been getting. Check out the lens comparisons on 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=710&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=718&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

The sigma is very sharp. On par with the canon 10-22mm. I had that lens too. I can't say about the tokina I have never had one. It is really a choice between the faster aperature and the wider angle of view. if you shoot landscape, take the 8-16. If you shoot lower light, indoors, the tokina will be more useful. At 4.5 the Sigmas widest aperature, you will find it limiting in low light.


----------



## AKCalixto (Feb 28, 2012)

Thanks for the comments !

;D


----------



## Bennymiata (Mar 9, 2012)

I have the Tokina, but was close to getting the Sigma 8-16mm.

The main reason I didn't go for the Sigma, was because being an ultra wide angle lens, I wanted to use it for landscapes, and as you can't put a filter (CP, ND etc.) on the Sigma, it would be a bit useless for me.
I also like to take indoor shots without flash, and the 2.8 of the Tokina sealed the deal.

The IQ of the Tokina is excellent, as is its depth of field, and the colours and contrast are also excellent and as good as any of my L lenses.

The new model just adds faster focussing, and to be frank with you, because of the deep DOF, you hardly need to focus anyway and a lot of my work is done in manual focussing anyway.


----------



## aprotosimaki (Mar 9, 2012)

I own the Sigma 8-16 and use it on an T2i. I cannot speak to the Tokina's capabilities since I have never used one. The Sigma though is superb. I absolutely love it not just because of its insane width at 8mm, close to almost being a fish-eye, but also because at the more relaxed 12-16mm range you lose that distortion and can grab some really intriguing shots. There is a Sigma group on flicker that is worth checking out for its capabilities. 

But as some one has mentioned, the bulb design does rule out filters and you do have to be careful since it is somewhat prone to being knocked. The lens is well built though. 

I think the question you need to ask is how wide do you want to go. Is the 11-16 wide enough for your purposes. For me, being able to use the 8-10mm is a bonus, which is what you get with the Sigma but you still have the 11-16mm, which the Tokina provides.

So in short I think it comes down to the question of filters and it is something that has bugged me a little to be honest but I have never thought of trading it for the Tokina or a 10-22.


----------



## Wideopen (Apr 10, 2012)

I chose the sigma 8-16 when i was searching for a uwa lens. Sometimes i wish i had gone for the tokina for the faster 2.8 apperture but when i tested the 8-16 i was sold on how much coverage i had at 8mm. Altho it cant accept filters and is a slower lens i prefer to tripod mount my camera for wide angle landscapes. If i need speed i just crank up the iso a lil bit and compensate. Theyre are both good lens.


----------

