Sigma 10-20 vs. Tokina 10-17

Ok, I have read some forums regarding these lenses, but i coudn't find one that compared the two. I am new on here so maybe im just not looking hard enough. I just purchased an Ike housing for my 20D, 8 inch dome, dual YS-250's, UL arms and the sigma 10-20mm. I was thinking about the canon 10-22mm but i like the feel of the sigma for topside, it feels much better then the plastic canon lens. Im just wonering if anyone has had experience using the Sigma 10-20 and the Tokina 10-17mm and could give me some input on what they thought of each. I wanted a lens I could use topside as well for some nice wide angle landscapes and i thought the Tokina was more of a fisheye and would distort the edges. Anyone have any info on these lenses? Mahalo in advance!

I have the Sigma 10-20 and altought I like it a lot i think its robustness leave a bit to desire, its the third lens I have, one broke in two, the other well not really Sigma's fault it spent two days underwater, but i've seen a few more coming in for loose barrels, mounts etc. as I said it a good lens optically, it just need to be pampered, The reason I got mine is because I have a 14mm already the Nikkor 12-24 was just too close to be of any interest. I still plan to keep my Sigma 10-20 and will most likely replace my 10.5 Nikon with the Tokina 10-17 which is a better lens for u/w usage than the Sigma 10-20 IMO. (Top side is the other way around, I much prefer the 10-20)

shoe string budget allround performance for top and u/w use my votes goes to the Sigma, eventually you'll long for the Tokina, I'm convince, underwater photography and saving money just don't belong together, the whole diving industry as a matter of fact qualify for that also.

Regards

I agreed with Jean, BTW have you seen this?:

http://www.tokinalens.com/products/tokina/...fdx-sample.html

That give you an idea about topside behaivour of both lens.

thanks for the input both of you, and that link. Those shots say enough for me. Im happy I went with the Sigma since ill be using it topside as well. I will def. be looking into the Tokina though once I get more into shooting underwater. Mahalo

I have both the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 10-17 FE.

The Tokina is far superior underwater, IMHO.

I now use the Canon for topside only.

Two good lenses for UW-use, but not really comparable, inmo. One is a fisheye lens that will give you an approximate 100-180° FoV throughout the zoom range on a cropped sensor. The other is a rectilinear lens that will give you roughly 60-100° FoV. So, they actually complement each other. Get both (or the Canon 10-22 instead of the Sigma - they are comparable)

BTW, my Sigma 10-20 at least 'feels' very sturdy and well built. I hope it's not an illusion.

good luck

It's seems funny to say that the Tokina is almost useless as a topside lens because of the distortion yet I never seem to take it off my underwater camera and use it for everything! Even when I did some archaeological pictures (underwater) with scale bars recently, I simply straightened them out in CS3.

It's seems funny to say that the Tokina is almost useless as a topside lens because of the distortion yet I never seem to take it off my underwater camera and use it for everything!

That's the nature of the beast, one of the "differences" I try to explain all too often to top side pro's wannabe who thing that all their year of studio will bail their sorry tush underwater, it's a different world with different rules and that's why I make it my rhealms.

Christian.... don't drop it else you find how easy you fall for illusion. The whole barrel assembly is plastic and the screw will tear out if you knock it around too much. if it wasn't for it optical qualities that lens would have been on e-bay along time ago.

Christian.... don't drop it else you find how easy you fall for illusion. The whole barrel assembly is plastic and the screw will tear out if you knock it around too much. if it wasn't for it optical qualities that lens would have been on e-bay along time ago.

It didn't cost much, so I guess there has to be a downside somewhere... I'll do my best to be good to it.

cheers

thanks again for all your advice. I actually just got everythign in the mail today. Havent done much with the lens yet, but im already liking it. Now im jsut waiting on the actual housing and arms and to get back to Hawaii next week. Wohoo.

I will probably look at the Tokina after I get a macro lens, I want to be able to shoot both wide and macro. Anyone have any suggestions on a nice macro for a 20D

Hi!!! long time it was but hier i am again and with a question.

I have to the same dilemma. Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 10-17

I need a zoom lens and my 17-55 was not great for UW. I am shooting just models underwater and i need good quality contrast and shapness in a lens.

As i say I need a Zoom and i am not sure if a fisheye lens as the tokina will deform my models face body

Take a look att my portfolio www.apneaimages.com category mermaids so u see what i am shooting.

Any recomendations are welcome.

Hi!!! long time it was but hier i am again and with a question.

I have to the same dilemma. Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 10-17

I need a zoom lens and my 17-55 was not great for UW. I am shooting just models underwater and i need good quality contrast and shapness in a lens.

 

As i say I need a Zoom and i am not sure if a fisheye lens as the tokina will deform my models face body

 

Take a look att my portfolio www.apneaimages.com category mermaids so u see what i am shooting.

 

Any recomendations are welcome.

Lambis, don't know where in Sweden you live, but if you're in Stockholm you're more than welcome to try my Sigma 10-20 on pool session and see if you like the results.

/c

Hey Lambis what's up, long time no hear. The Tokina has many qualities, but a portrait lens it is not. you cn get away with a fisheye in open water with a geared up diver as a subject in the background, but pool stuff in close proximity with a lot human feature apparent in the image, the fisheye curvature IMO will be too much. especially when it come time to sell the images to the persons in the photographs, they can tell something is wrong with the way they look.

Hey Lambis, still free diving, still too poor to buy scuba gears

Hey Lambis what's up, long time no hear. The Tokina has many qualities, but a portrait lens it is not. you cn get away with a fisheye in open water with a geared up diver as a subject in the background, but pool stuff in close proximity with a lot human feature apparent in the image, the fisheye curvature IMO will be too much. especially when it come time to sell the images to the persons in the photographs, they can tell something is wrong with the way they look.

 

Hey Lambis, still free diving, still too poor to buy scuba gears

HEllo...:-) Yes i know long time.. I was much working topside those days but yes.. Still freediving no money for scuba gear i put those in Studio lights and cameras:-)

Yes this is the issue.. Pool & human bodys and faces and fisheye = no good. I have give a try with the 17-55mm but it was a disaster. Sometimes i think that i was soooooo stupid to seel my tokina 12-24.

The Issue with the Sigma 10-20 that as its look in the pappers is perfect for narow pools sessions (Offen the pools are very small) Is the sharpness, contrast & color. I am not sure.

Positive is that becauce the lens is small , have a intern focus, and good close focus its look like it will work with just my 170 dome and this is to a plus point. to have a small rig underwater

Lambis

Lambis,

I have both lenses. I only got the Tokina recently but I did use it in a pool once (actually this is the only time I have used it) and some photos are here Pool shots (ignore the "family" snapshots )

However I also found that with the 10-20, objects on the periphery tend to become distorted, though of course not as much as the Tokina. I also shot a couple of pool shots with the 10-20 here More Pool Shots. Note the guy's head in the second shot.....but could this a result of something other than the lens alone - maybe the housing's optics? Dunno...I'm no expert!

Hi Lambis,

Good to see you back my friend! I like the new mermaid photos in your gallery - very nice!

I agree that you can not use the fisheye lens for models. Even with the 10-20 you will have problems, but they will be pin-cushion distortion in the corners, the opposite of barrel distortion. Just keep the model in the middle if you can.

Cheers

James