Tokina 11-16 or Canon 10-18mm

smr

smr

Soldato
Joined
6 Mar 2008
Posts
8,761
Location
Leicestershire
Hi all,

Having a bit of tough choice as to which of these lenses to buy, as I'm after an UWA lens.

So I'm after some advice from some more seasoned photographers as to which would suit me best... it would make sense to say what my needs are and the price of each lens...

I can get the Tokina 11-16 (2.8) for £369 from a reputable UK stockist dealer with a 2 year warranty and the Canon I can get for £215 from again a reputable dealer ... I realise I could pick the Tokina up for £300 but I would rather plump up the extra cash for a genuine UK retailer/warranty etc.

Anyway, I'm into landscape photography and will mostly shoot at dawn, dusk and during the day, but night time photography, whilst not something that am all that keen on at the moment, could be something that may interest me.

I do enjoy taking a tripod to wherever I am, and enjoy slow shutter speed photography and taking time to compose frames rather than hand held point and shooting, so creative exposures or photos to convey movement is what I enjoy.

The tricky part is that I'm off to Iceland soon and would love to take some sharp photos with detail of the Northern Lights, if we are lucky enough to see them... when I'm back home there won't be any real need for night time photography however, as I've already stated....

So with all this in mind, I definitely need the Tokina for Iceland, whether I rent or buy the lens outright) as the 4.5 maximum aperture of the Canon just won't be enough to get nice sharp NL photos), so, should I...

A) Buy the Tokina (£369) or
B) Rent the Tokina for Iceland but then buy the Canon when I come back... (73+215) (£288)
 
If f/2.8 is important to you then get the Tokina (possibly better for the Aurora as well) otherwise I'd get the Canon which looks like an utter bargain looking at the reviews / price.
 
Other than image quality (I'm not sure which is best) then I guess you just need to decide whether you want a lens with a bit more width and IS or a faster aperture that's a bit more expensive.
 
The normal reason to get the Tokina is for f/2.8, the normal reason not to is the 11-16mm is quite restrictive and lenses like the 10-24mm are much more versatile and will involve swapping lenses less often. Under 16mm is very wide so it is something that is only used occasionally, 16-24mm is a sweat spot on crop for most landscape work etc.

The thing is the canon 10-18mm doesn't offer much more than the Tokina. Normally I tell people to avoid the Tokina unless they do astro stuff before the extra aperture is pointless in landscape or interior when tripod mounted. But in this case I think the Tokina is worth it icer the canon 10-18mm. The canon is a good lens but doesn't give enough extra zoom to make up for being 2 stops slower.
 
Thanks for the advice guys... I've decided to bite the bullet on hiring the Tokina for a week, lensforhire are doing a 50 percent off in february deal so I've got it for £36.50 for 8 days, bargain! I'll decide when I come back home whether I want to buy it but I feel that I may go for the Canon 10-18. The Northern Light pictures on flickr (with the Tokina) look amazing, and if we're lucky enough to see them it's definitely going to make for better photos, easier with the infinity focus ability too.
 
I have the Tokina 11-16. It's a great lens, I wasn't too bothered about it being restricted to 16mm as you buy a wide lens to go wide! Also the f/2.8 is a god send for when I used to use it for nightclub videos!
 
I have the Tokina 11-16. It's a great lens, I wasn't too bothered about it being restricted to 16mm as you buy a wide lens to go wide! Also the f/2.8 is a god send for when I used to use it for nightclub videos!

I'd agree, it's down to what works for you- to me 16mm doesn't even feel UWA on APS-C. My 12mm is pretty much glued to my Fuji. I sometimes wish I'd gone with the 10mm....

For me it's better to be too wide and crop later than miss compositional elements altogether.
 
Back
Top Bottom