Wide lens recommendations?

Quackles

A friend of mine is looking for a wide angle (17mm-odd), not prime, replacement lens for his kit lens (canon 400d). IS is a must to him, he wants to be able to take photos of landscapes behind people with no loss of sharpness due to DOF, so he doesn't want to drop the F stop. Also, he cycles/walks everywhere, so a tripod isn't really an option. Any recommendations? Not sure of his budget, but he works for the same company as me, so it can't be in the thousands I'm afraid I know very little about such things, and IS seems to be, understandably, more common in zoom lenses.

Any help would be appreciated!

Paulw

Well, the kit lens is 18-55mm. The next option, with IS, is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. Never used it, so no idea about it.

elven

Some suggestions about wide lenses here:

http://georgebarr.blogspot.com/2008/02/lenses-for-landscapes.html

Assuming we're talking canon mount, that is...

Covey

Quackles wrote: »

IS is a must to him, he wants to be able to take photos of landscapes behind people with no loss of sharpness due to DOF

Explain further please?

Zillah

I walk and cycle everywhere and I use a tripod. Landscapes without a tripod...now really.

Stephen

Do you mean IQ (image quality) rather than IS (image stabilization)?

PaulieC

I think she did mean IS, so her friend could handhold at very small apertures in order to keep everything sharp from front to back. I don't think IS really matters at such wide angles as the wider your angle the larger the DoF is an any given aperture, meaning you don't have to stop down as far to get a large DoF as you would with a longer focal length

Quackles

Stephen wrote: »

Do you mean IQ (image quality) rather than IS (image stabilization)?

No, I mean image stabilization. He insists that he wants to drop shutter speed rather than aperture, so he wants the IS to counteract his movements on a long shutter speed. Not saying I agree with him, this is just what he wants I originally suggested a nice fast lens, but he is insistent on IS.

I think he's looked at the canon 18-55mm IS (yes, it is canon mount, he has a 400d), but was wondering if there were any other options, I don't think he was too impressed with what he saw of that lens at its widest setting (from reading reviews).

mathias

very small apertures in order to keep everything sharp from front to back

I dont think thats possible , is it ? If it is , someone please let me know , with a wide open aperture surely front to back clarity with an aps c size sensor is impossible , everything Ive read tells me so anyway ! I have a 17-40L , and at F4 I cannot get a everything in focus , no matter how hard Ive tried.

Stephen

I would have read small aperture to mean something like f/16-22.

Quackles

Stephen wrote: »

I would have read small aperture to mean something like f/16-22.

And you'd be right I just always think small number = small as opposed to small hole = small, even though I know different, and in this case, didn't think before I typed - sorry!

Paulw

Even with IS, landscapes with slow shutter speeds will show blur. IS just isn't going to do what your friend wants.

A tripod is crucial for landscape images, or else a fast shutter speed. Ideally, for landscape images you'll want to shoot f/8-f/16. Anything over that you're not really going to get much more sharpness, due to the lenses. You should only be using f/22 and greater when you want a specific effect (long exposure, flowing water, etc.)

Best of luck though, and hope it's not money wasted.

Arciphel

Speaking from the Nikon, ultra-wide angle, side of things, i bought a Sigma 10-20mm lens before christmas & I love it, it's great for getting really up close & capturing some mind-bending perspectives.

There is one for sale on adverts.ie at the moment for a canon mount, i have no connection with the seller and i'm not trying to drum up business for him i hasten to add!! see link --> http://www.adverts.ie/showproduct.php?product=45553&cat=51

they sell for €500 new in a bricks & mortar store in ireland, so his asking price of €400 is decent and you might be able to haggle it down further if you try.

sheesh

If your friend wants to do landscape they should get a tripod as advised in elvens posted link get a cheap one if they want to save money or if they want to save weight get a dear tripod. That way the the aperture can be as small as you like e.g. f15 and bingo everything is in focus

this is taken of the lakes of killarney on a 30 euro tripod and a 50mm f1.8 on the landscape setting


looks fairly crappy but there is reasonable focus throughout in the original plus you can stitch them together really easily if you put it on a tripod then it starts to look good. the fence in the foreground was maybe 20 ft away

I have a bag that goes with the tripod so you can sling it over your shoulder or tie it to your rucksack or bike

broad_sword

Yep... I'd agree with all the above. He does NOT need Image Stabilisation at all. He needs a good tripod and the highest quality glass he can afford. I use a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon D200. I also use a good quality tripod, mirror lock-up and remote release in order to keep images as sharp as possible. I'd usually stop the lens down to about F16 or so; beyond that aperture, you're losing sharpness due to the optics - I think the Nikkor 12-24 and Tokina options may fare better than the Sigma at small apertures.
Just my tuppence worth...

bradnailer

broad_sword wrote: »

Yep... I'd agree with all the above. He does NOT need Image Stabilisation at all. He needs a good tripod and the highest quality glass he can afford. I use a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon D200. I also use a good quality tripod, mirror lock-up and remote release in order to keep images as sharp as possible. I'd usually stop the lens down to about F16 or so; beyond that aperture, you're losing sharpness due to the optics - I think the Nikkor 12-24 and Tokina options may fare better than the Sigma at small apertures.
Just my tuppence worth...

Why Mirror lock-up ?

leohoju

bradnailer wrote: »

Why Mirror lock-up ?

Allows the camera to steady itself and should therefore prevent any potential camera shake. Have a look at this and this for more information.

Zillah

mathias wrote: »

everything Ive read tells me so anyway ! I have a 17-40L , and at F4 I cannot get a everything in focus , no matter how hard Ive tried.

Physically small, numerically large.

That is to say, F22 is a large number, but the aperture on the camera is physically very small. F4 is a small number, but physically the aperture is rather large.

Pity they made it backwards like that.

PaulieC

Zillah wrote: »

Physically small, numerically large.

That is to say, F22 is a large number, but the aperture on the camera is physically very small. F4 is a small number, but physically the aperture is rather large.

Pity they made it backwards like that.

f22 really means 1/22 (very small) and f4 means 1/4 (not so small). The f-stops are all fractions, hence the backward looking numbers