10mm is a full 10% wider than 11mm, and 22mm is a LOT narrower than 16mm. End result; the Canon needs changing out a lot less. You'll be using the Tamron 17-50mm much more if you get the Tokina 11-16mm. This is more significant than it might sound, since there's a lot less "WA distortion" around the edges at 22mm than there is at 16mm, and you would find that a fair number of times you want to try the same image in wide-and-narrower versions for that reason. ESPECIALLY if you get in the habit of using the camera in vertical orientation for horizontal architecture shots, effectively turning it into a shift lens where you crop the foreground out. The resolution of the 7D makes this a more viable option than it was with the 30D I do it a lot with the 5D.
Whilst the 11-16 Tokina makes a point of their nearly distortion-free optics, it's worth noting that the same is true of the 10-22 Canon. It's absolutely outstanding in that regard. And it's worth noting, also, that the above is in reference to BARREL distortion, the distortion that makes horizons seem bulged, and NOT to the so-called "WA distortion", which is an optical phenomenon that has to do entirely with angle-of-view and can't be corrected in a lens.
I'd go with the Canon 10-22mm, if you haven't figured that out by now.
R.
Message edited by author 2010-01-16 10:15:26. |
