Wide lens (super wide)

jackdaw

Hi
I was thinking of getting a good wide lens ..
I have bought 2 L lenses and maybe would like to get L type lenses from
now on .. but i see there are no L super wide zooms ? there is a 14mm L f2.8 prime ...

I see SIGMA have a 10-22 mm , is this good ? can anyone recommend it ?

Or do TAMRON have a good super wide zoom ?

pity Canon don't have a 10-20 L ...

Paulw

Canon 14mm f/2.8 L is their widest L lens.

Canon's 16-35mm f/2.8 II L is the widest zoom they have.

The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is a nice lens, but certainly not L class.

That's about as good as it gets, in the Canon range.

sasar

Are you using FF?

m_stan

I have a sigma 10-20 on a Canon 400d (1.6 crop factor). It's a little on the soft side, but a nice lens for the cost. Judge for yourself by looking at the shots I've taken with this lens.

City-Exile

OP, what camera are you using?

MataЯ

Not sure if the sigma lens is a "super wide" lens, but it does have a bit of a fisheye effect if that's what you're looking for. Used a 400d.

duffarama

Run an Olympus alongside your Canon gear purely for this...

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/OlympusE714mm/

It's a stunning lens, if you want to find photos from it do a flickr or dpreview search for zd 7-14mm

Fajitas!

The 14mm is Canon's widest lens on full frame, but the 15mm fisheye has a greater degree of vision, if corrected, giving something about a 12mm lens.

If you're on a cropped camera, the widest you'll get is the 4.5mm from Sigma.

Siggy, Tammy and Canon all do mid priced zooms of around the 10-20 range though

All get quite good reviews.

jackdaw

City-Exile wrote: »

OP, what camera are you using?

Now I use a 400D . Soon ill get the succesor to the 40D .. when it comes out in Autumn ...

or maybe a 5D MKII not sure .. probably the 50D ...

I prefer the 1.6X for the extra length ...


and sorry what is FF ?

sasar

FF- full frame.


Check out tokina 11-16 f/2.8

jackdaw

Ah FF of course!!!

So the Tokina is good then ??

Id like something approaching L class ...

id like the 16-35 f2.8 MKII .. but I have the 24-70 L f2.8 and frankly
for 8mm i can't justificate that money ...

Freddie59

I use the Tokina 12-24

sasar

Well, if your are thinking of buying FF camera, forget about tokina.

I had sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 which I got rid of and now have this tokina which is 2.8. Happy days.

Duchovny

jackdaw wrote: »

Hi
I was thinking of getting a good wide lens ..
I have bought 2 L lenses and maybe would like to get L type lenses from
now on .. but i see there are no L super wide zooms ? there is a 14mm L f2.8 prime ...

I see SIGMA have a 10-22 mm , is this good ? can anyone recommend it ?

Or do TAMRON have a good super wide zoom ?

pity Canon don't have a 10-20 L ...

The 10-22 from Canon has L quality, check the reviews...

paudie

Another vote for the Canon, all the water shots in the "surf" and "empties" sections on my website are shot using it.
http://www.paud.ie

Stephen

I Sigma 10-20. Fantastic lens for the money.

what to do?

yeah i also find the sigma 10-20 very good - and i dont really think you need f2.8 on a wide angle, in fact - if you're taking landscape - well, i find that i have the aperture turned to double figures to try keep everything in focus.

conkeroo

what to do? wrote: »

yeah i also find the sigma 10-20 very good - and i dont really think you need f2.8 on a wide angle, in fact - if you're taking landscape - well, i find that i have the aperture turned to double figures to try keep everything in focus.

As a side, normally when taking landscapes, if your using filters, you're gonna need a tripod anyway so the larger aperture isn't need. And like you said, you'll probably use f/8 - f/11 to keep every thing in focus.

Stephen

Here's one from the 10-20 on my humble D50 from the weekend:



Cropped a bit though. You can see the distortion happening at the edges, particularly on the bike at the left of the frame.

Here's another showing how ridiculously wide this can go

Arciphel

I had the Sigma 10-20mm, great lens it is. However, after reading some early reviews I sold it to buy the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 ATX pro and very happy I did. I love wide-angle stuff and the Tokina is razor sharp from centre to edge, good CA, and can shoot at f2.8 although is best between f4 and f11. It's my fave lens by some margin!

here's a link to my flickr set of all the images I have taken with this lens on my D300 - Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 Pro Flickr Set

smash

I rented a 16-35 for the weekend there and I loved it! I like shooting cars and so it's great for that but it does distort when shooting people if they're not right in the center

jackdaw

I was in Conns at the weekend and they told me the Sigma 10-20 is
better optically then the canon 10-22 ....

TelePaul

jackdaw wrote: »

I was in Conns at the weekend and they told me the Sigma 10-20 is
better optically then the canon 10-22 ....

I read a digital photo mag review of super wide angles and the sigma cleaned house.

jackdaw

Sigma 10-22 would work on a FF camera aswell =?

FX Meister

no, it wont.

Shiny

It will but with vignetting on the wide end.

Arciphel

jackdaw wrote: »

I was in Conns at the weekend and they told me the Sigma 10-20 is
better optically then the canon 10-22 ....

I am a Nikon shooter so I have no agenda here, the only thing I would say there is be careful; shops may get a higher margin on Sigma lenses than Canon/Nikon ones, and may as a result push them to customers.

I think a valid question in that case is to ask the sales guy how many "points" he gets from a Sigma vs. a Canon/Nikon lens. If he gets narky with you then thats a clue right there!

FX Meister

Shiny wrote: »

It will but with vignetting on the wide end.

So in other words it wont work

Calina

Another vote for the Sigma 10-20 It is not a 10-22 by the way. Again, for DOF reasons I tend to use it at f8 because I have the kite and distance from kitesurfer to deal with so the 2.8 on the Tokina is irrelevant to me.

DotOrg

jackdaw wrote: »

I was in Conns at the weekend and they told me the Sigma 10-20 is
better optically then the canon 10-22 ....

did he give you any reference for his optical knowledge or was he just trying to sell you something as he thought you wouldn't shell out for the more expensive canon lens?

conns isn't just their name, it's their philosphy ;-)

DaireQuinlan

DotOrg wrote: »

conns isn't just their name, it's their philosphy ;-)

Ah now :-) I quite like conns. I've been in there a few times and I've never had anything other than a pleasant experience. The first time I was in I was buying a 2nd hand F4 body they had, and the fairly young sales assistant who was looking after the sale was surprisingly knowledgeable about the film body lineup (they also had a 2nd hand F5 body and a couple of f100's and f90's). I think he was actually trying to persuade me NOT to buy the F4. The next time I was in I was buying Velvia and when I specifically asked for 100 instead of the 100f the guy let me know that they'd have the re-released 50 emulsion in soon and that they could let me know by text when it came in.

Although as always, I guess, YMMV.

jackdaw

To open this up again, I was about to get the SIGMA 10-20 .. but some guy at a photoshop told me the TOKINA 12-24 was much better ?????


cheaper too ....

Shiny

It has a higher rating than the sigma on FredMiranda.

See here
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=327&sort=4&cat=40&page=1


I'm actually tempted to get this myself.

jackdaw

I know it's silly .. but im losing a little at the wide end ...


i have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 ..

so for just an extra 5mm ??

will the tokina work with FF as i might get the 5D eventually..

Shiny

I don't think it does work as they mention this in the specs:

Recommended Sensor size: APS-C Sized (23.7 X15.6mm)

The only thing I would have against the Tokina might be that
additional 2mm ie if you are going wide you might as well go as
wide as possible.

If you are getting a 5D wouldn't it be better to get the
24-105mm ? Expensive but wide and good reach too.

jackdaw

Shiny wrote: »

I don't think it does work as they mention this in the specs:



The only thing I would have against the Tokina might be that
additional 2mm ie if you are going wide you might as well go as
wide as possible.

If you are getting a 5D wouldn't it be better to get the
24-105mm ? Expensive but wide and good reach too.

I have the 24-70 L f2.8

so yeah, maybe with FF i wouldn't need 10mm ... or i could go for a prime fisheye ....

ill think about it for another month ... let's see what photokina announces..

Shiny

Yeah 24mm on FF would be equivilant to 15mm on a crop camera so
you would be wasting money getting a wide angle then.

As you say yourself a prime might be a better option.

FX Meister

the 14mm prime on a 5d is super sweet. Might be out of your budget though

Paulw

For a good wide, on a full-frame, the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 II L lens is supposed to be brilliant.

It's on my current shopping list, even though I don't have a FF body yet. My 1.3x crop will have to do for now.

liveforphotos

I have a Sigma 12-24 and I am very happy with it. The field of view is awesome. Very good quality and sharpness too.

FX Meister

Paulw wrote: »

For a good wide, on a full-frame, the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 II L lens is supposed to be brilliant.

It's on my current shopping list, even though I don't have a FF body yet. My 1.3x crop will have to do for now.

I had my eye on that one too until I tried the 14mm. I much prefered the 14mm.

Arkana

Well, I don't know if there is any interest for this here, but since the thread shows 'super wide' in the title, maybe it is...
I am working with Minolta, Leica, Panasonic and Carl Zeiss. Just to give you an impression that my equipment is quite large, and I am using it - I am no collector. In the Minolta manual focus range I have (it is no longer built though - but probably you can purchase this lens still on the second hand market) the MC 7,5mm, which is a 'real' fish eye, means the picture is totally round, because the lens has an angle of 180 degrees. That is, if you take a horizontal 'landscape' photo, the tips of your shoes cover a slim area of the lower third part of the edge of the circular picture. If people like you are interested I might post next time some sample pictures.:o (as soon as I have learned to do it in here)

FX Meister

isn't carl zeiss dead? I don't believe you

Arkana

Veeery funny. No longer any discussable to say, eh?:D