Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 or Sigma 20mm 1.8 at DVinfo.net

Dan Burnap · November 23rd, 2010, 06:06 AM

Hi Guys, I shoot mainly low-light weddings with two HMC150s. I am going to aquire a Canon 60D with an aim to add include some scenes \ clips. I.e I am not looking to shoot an entire wedding with just the Canon. It's to add something to the edit.

Currently I have the following lenses:

Canon 50mm 1.8
Sigma 24-70mm 2.8

I am planning to use the Canon mainly at the receptions on a Glidecam and Glidetrack. Also for Bridal preparations.

Feeling I am lacking in the wide lens area I am considering the two lenses in the title. If 20mm is considered to be wide enough on a crop camera then I'll probably go for that as it's faster than the Tokina.

Any opinions appreciated, thanks

Lee Ying · November 23rd, 2010, 03:30 PM

I have both Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 20. For indoors I use Sigma a lot more often than Tokina simply because its a much brighter lens. There is almost no indoor scene that is too dim for a F1.8 DSLR videocam, if you kick the iso up to 1600 and drop the shutter to 1/30.
But is 20mm wide enough for you? well, you are probably the only one who can answer that. For 20mm on a 1.6x crop sensor the focal length is 32mm on 35mm equavelant, which is 32/43=0.74x magnification. You can dial in 0.74x on your HMC150 to see the same perspective as Sigma 20mm on T2i. The same can be done for Tokina at11mm, which is 11x1.6/43=0.41x mag.
Some drawbacks for Glidecam though; for Sigma the DOF is shallow at f1.8, so objects out of your focal range may look blurred. If you like such DSLR effect, it may be desireable; for Tokina, the wide angle distortion can be very pronounced when you pan it.

Mark Von Lanken · November 23rd, 2010, 07:14 PM

Hi Dan,

I currently have 3 HMC150s a 60D and T2i. I am in transition, but our current workflow is to use the HMC150s for some Prep, most of the Ceremony and a safe shot during the Reception.

I love shooting the Reception with the 60D and fast lenses, but the narrow DoF is tricky. Based on your current lenses and a desire to shoot Glidecam on the 60D, I would get the Tokina first. It is a great lens to shoot Glidecam, tracking/slider shots and even handheld. At 2.8 it's not as fast as I would like, but I don't know of a faster lens in that focal length, at least that is affordable.

Here is a recent Same Day Edit.

You will see two Glidecam shots with the Tokina around 1:04 and 1:09. Then during the reception, to the best of my memory, shots at 2:03, 2:13-2:22, 2:28-2:32, 2:37 and 2:57 were with the Tokina. Since it's such a wide lens, at 2.8, it has a really deep DoF. The other Reception shots with the 60D had either a 50mm 1.4 or an 85mm 1.4.

The Sigma at 2.8 will have a narrower DoF since it's 20mm and while it is certainly possible to Glidecam with it and keep the shot in focus, it is much easier with the Tokina. I do not have the Sigma 20, but I think it would be great for dark receptions for general dancing, on or off the Glidecam, but maybe even more off than on. Since I don't have the lens, I can't speak for personal experience.

Dan Burnap · November 24th, 2010, 04:33 AM

Gents, thanks very much for taking the time to write some very informative replies.

Brett Culp · November 24th, 2010, 07:36 AM

The Sigma 20mm 1.8 is my go-to lens for filming dancing at weddings/events. It's wide enough to capture the action, but not so wide that it has a fisheye distortion. I love it.

Jeff Krepner · November 24th, 2010, 07:37 AM

Dan, I can't speak to the Tokina 11-16, but I do own the Sigma 20 1.8 and use it on nearly every shoot (which is mostly corporate and web ads) and find it wonderful to work with and like you said it turns into more of a normal wide(ish) lens on the T2i. I'd go for speed over zoom. Sure the zoom is nice to get better framing and of course at times the zoom is the only way to get a shot, but I'd rather have to move myself physically knowing that I'm getting the brightest picture possible.

I'd like to get the Tokina too, maybe you can get both. I've been buying used glass from KEH (though they don't seem to have the Sigma 20 used at the moment.) FWIW, I bought the Nikon version in order to have manual aperture control, though it might be better to have autofocus for weddings I'm guessing.

Dan Burnap · November 24th, 2010, 04:22 PM

Guys, finding a good deal on Ebay for the Sigma 20mm swung it for me,looking forward to shooting with it. Hopefully I be able to get the Tokina some time as well. Thanks again for all the input!

Wacharapong Chiowanich · November 24th, 2010, 08:56 PM

Surprised that a few of you here like the Sigma 20 f/1.8. I found it to be ultra-soft at the max aperture down to about f/2.8 on my full-frame and APS-C Nikons. One major benefit, though, was that happened to get rid of all the moire and aliases on susceptible subjects like roofs, walls, street markings etc. I sold it sometime ago.

I suggest you try it before you buy if you plan to shoot with it at the max or near max apertures. The softness I'm talking about was over the whole frame, not just at the edges of the frame. Shooting at night with bright light sources in the frame there were also very noticeable (and ugly) coma flares.

The lens was OK at medium apertures i.e. f/4 to about f/11.

Jeff Krepner · November 25th, 2010, 12:00 PM

Wide open it might be a bit soft, but I'll take that over a slower lens and the assumed grain from increasing gain/ISO speed especially considering the codec isn't very forgiving. If light isn't a problem then you'd be shooting in the mid apertures, and like you said, the lens is pretty sharp in that range.

What other options in the 20mm range that are fast? I have Zeiss in the longer focal lengths but read mixed reviews on the 21mm/2 and couldn't swing the $1800 price tag. I think for a budget video lens the Sigma 20mm 1.8 is worth a shot.

Lee Ying · November 28th, 2010, 09:28 AM

My impression of Sigma20 1.8 is that between 1.8 and 2.8 the AF is way off. If someone is using AF for photography sigma at 1.8 is definately soft. At1.8 it does have a dreamy look though, just like the Canon 50 f1.4, but it doesn't lose lot of details. For video its plenty sharp even at 1.8 if you use manual focus.

November 23rd, 2010, 06:06 AM	#1
Dan Burnap Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rio de Janeiro Posts: 335	Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 or Sigma 20mm 1.8 Hi Guys, I shoot mainly low-light weddings with two HMC150s. I am going to aquire a Canon 60D with an aim to add include some scenes \ clips. I.e I am not looking to shoot an entire wedding with just the Canon. It's to add something to the edit. Currently I have the following lenses: Canon 50mm 1.8 Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 I am planning to use the Canon mainly at the receptions on a Glidecam and Glidetrack. Also for Bridal preparations. Feeling I am lacking in the wide lens area I am considering the two lenses in the title. If 20mm is considered to be wide enough on a crop camera then I'll probably go for that as it's faster than the Tokina. Any opinions appreciated, thanks

November 23rd, 2010, 07:14 PM	#3
Mark Von Lanken Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 910	Hi Dan, I currently have 3 HMC150s a 60D and T2i. I am in transition, but our current workflow is to use the HMC150s for some Prep, most of the Ceremony and a safe shot during the Reception. I love shooting the Reception with the 60D and fast lenses, but the narrow DoF is tricky. Based on your current lenses and a desire to shoot Glidecam on the 60D, I would get the Tokina first. It is a great lens to shoot Glidecam, tracking/slider shots and even handheld. At 2.8 it's not as fast as I would like, but I don't know of a faster lens in that focal length, at least that is affordable. Here is a recent Same Day Edit. Wedding Day Edit with a Persian Flair on Vimeo You will see two Glidecam shots with the Tokina around 1:04 and 1:09. Then during the reception, to the best of my memory, shots at 2:03, 2:13-2:22, 2:28-2:32, 2:37 and 2:57 were with the Tokina. Since it's such a wide lens, at 2.8, it has a really deep DoF. The other Reception shots with the 60D had either a 50mm 1.4 or an 85mm 1.4. The Sigma at 2.8 will have a narrower DoF since it's 20mm and while it is certainly possible to Glidecam with it and keep the shot in focus, it is much easier with the Tokina. I do not have the Sigma 20, but I think it would be great for dark receptions for general dancing, on or off the Glidecam, but maybe even more off than on. Since I don't have the lens, I can't speak for personal experience. __________________ Mark Von Lanken www.VonWeddingFilms.com

November 23rd, 2010, 03:30 PM	#2
Lee Ying Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 73	I have both Tokina 11-16 and Sigma 20. For indoors I use Sigma a lot more often than Tokina simply because its a much brighter lens. There is almost no indoor scene that is too dim for a F1.8 DSLR videocam, if you kick the iso up to 1600 and drop the shutter to 1/30. But is 20mm wide enough for you? well, you are probably the only one who can answer that. For 20mm on a 1.6x crop sensor the focal length is 32mm on 35mm equavelant, which is 32/43=0.74x magnification. You can dial in 0.74x on your HMC150 to see the same perspective as Sigma 20mm on T2i. The same can be done for Tokina at11mm, which is 11x1.6/43=0.41x mag. Some drawbacks for Glidecam though; for Sigma the DOF is shallow at f1.8, so objects out of your focal range may look blurred. If you like such DSLR effect, it may be desireable; for Tokina, the wide angle distortion can be very pronounced when you pan it.

November 24th, 2010, 04:33 AM	#4
Dan Burnap Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rio de Janeiro Posts: 335	Gents, thanks very much for taking the time to write some very informative replies.

November 24th, 2010, 07:36 AM	#5
Brett Culp New Boot Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: tampa, fl Posts: 22	The Sigma 20mm 1.8 is my go-to lens for filming dancing at weddings/events. It's wide enough to capture the action, but not so wide that it has a fisheye distortion. I love it.

November 24th, 2010, 07:37 AM	#6
Jeff Krepner Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Timonium, MD Posts: 142	Dan, I can't speak to the Tokina 11-16, but I do own the Sigma 20 1.8 and use it on nearly every shoot (which is mostly corporate and web ads) and find it wonderful to work with and like you said it turns into more of a normal wide(ish) lens on the T2i. I'd go for speed over zoom. Sure the zoom is nice to get better framing and of course at times the zoom is the only way to get a shot, but I'd rather have to move myself physically knowing that I'm getting the brightest picture possible. I'd like to get the Tokina too, maybe you can get both. I've been buying used glass from KEH (though they don't seem to have the Sigma 20 used at the moment.) FWIW, I bought the Nikon version in order to have manual aperture control, though it might be better to have autofocus for weddings I'm guessing.

November 24th, 2010, 04:22 PM	#7
Dan Burnap Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rio de Janeiro Posts: 335	Guys, finding a good deal on Ebay for the Sigma 20mm swung it for me,looking forward to shooting with it. Hopefully I be able to get the Tokina some time as well. Thanks again for all the input!

November 24th, 2010, 08:56 PM	#8
Wacharapong Chiowanich Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Posts: 400	Surprised that a few of you here like the Sigma 20 f/1.8. I found it to be ultra-soft at the max aperture down to about f/2.8 on my full-frame and APS-C Nikons. One major benefit, though, was that happened to get rid of all the moire and aliases on susceptible subjects like roofs, walls, street markings etc. I sold it sometime ago. I suggest you try it before you buy if you plan to shoot with it at the max or near max apertures. The softness I'm talking about was over the whole frame, not just at the edges of the frame. Shooting at night with bright light sources in the frame there were also very noticeable (and ugly) coma flares. The lens was OK at medium apertures i.e. f/4 to about f/11.

November 25th, 2010, 12:00 PM	#9
Jeff Krepner Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Timonium, MD Posts: 142	Wide open it might be a bit soft, but I'll take that over a slower lens and the assumed grain from increasing gain/ISO speed especially considering the codec isn't very forgiving. If light isn't a problem then you'd be shooting in the mid apertures, and like you said, the lens is pretty sharp in that range. What other options in the 20mm range that are fast? I have Zeiss in the longer focal lengths but read mixed reviews on the 21mm/2 and couldn't swing the $1800 price tag. I think for a budget video lens the Sigma 20mm 1.8 is worth a shot.

November 28th, 2010, 09:28 AM	#10
Lee Ying Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 73	My impression of Sigma20 1.8 is that between 1.8 and 2.8 the AF is way off. If someone is using AF for photography sigma at 1.8 is definately soft. At1.8 it does have a dreamy look though, just like the Canon 50 f1.4, but it doesn't lose lot of details. For video its plenty sharp even at 1.8 if you use manual focus.