# Canon 10-22 vs Tokina 11-16 - Low Light Situations



## max3k (Apr 22, 2010)

I am looking to purchase a wide angle zoon. I have experience with the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 but none with the Canon.

I know both are good lenses, but my specific need is for low lighting. Inside my church the lighting is absolutely horrible. Would the extra stop be better than the extra focal distance? 2.8 to 3.5 isnt huge. 

My other question; Why is the Canon 10-22 not an L lens?


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 22, 2010)

> My other question; Why is the Canon 10-22 not an L lens?


Canon doesn't give the L designation to EF-*S* lenses.

I've heard it said that both the EF-S 10-22mm and the EF-S 17-55mm are of L quality, but neither have the red ring.

I've got the 10-22mm, and it's a great lens.  There are issues with corner sharpness and CA, but that's what you get with an ultra wide angle lens like this.  This one is better than most, according to the reviews.  

As for the max aperture...I guess it would be a little helpful to have a it a bit bigger...but it's not even a full stop (on the wide end).  DOF isn't really an issue because you won't get it very shallow with such a short lens anyway...and camera shake isn't much of an issue with short focal lengths either.  I guess the biggest issue is shutter speeds to freeze moving subjects in low light...and F2.8 would help a bit...but like I said, it's not even a whole stop.  

If you are choosing between these two lenses (you might also add the Sigma 10-20mm), I think the biggest factor should be image quality.  (that's why I went with the 10-22mm anyway).


----------



## bennielou (Apr 22, 2010)

I'm not familiar with the Tonika but the Sigma seems to be highly on the red end.  I'm not sure why a lens would affect a photo that way, but that is my experience.

Shoot in dark churches is my specialty.  
2.8 is plenty fast, but you are going to need to tweek your settings.
I shoot 1600 at 60 shutter on all indoor dark church weddings.  You will need a steady hand to do this.  Don't be afraid to pump up the ISO.  That is a mistake many people make.


----------



## j-digg (Apr 22, 2010)

Hey Mike, can you note at what focal lengths the 10-22 the max aperture changes?


----------



## table1349 (Apr 22, 2010)

I owned the Canon 10-22 and loved it.  It was an excellent piece of glass that gave stunning results.  I did however sell it and pick up the Tokina.  

The Tokina was to me as good as the Canon for what I was using the 10-22 for.   The f2.8 however made it fast enough to use for basketball and volleyball with some very interesting results.  The lens now does double duty for me with the better low light performance.


----------

