Canon Ultra wide angle lens advice (crop sensor)

M5

Hi all,


just wondering what your thoughts on the sigma 8-16mm and the Canon 10-22mm lenses are. Which would you go for and why? Is there anything you don't like about either lens? I know you cant use a filter with the sigma due to the convex shape of the front element

I will predominantly use the lens for landscape or cityscape/indoor photography where wide angle is required

PCPhoto

no offence to independent lens users but if its a choice between Canon or Sigma ... I'd go for Canon.

difference between 8mm and 10mm would be fairly negligible.

Alternatively - rent/borrow/buy a full frame sensor camera and use Canon lens - I may be a lens snob but I tend to stick with Canon lenses for Canon Cameras, I have found in the past that the Sigma lenses that I had (and still have somewhere I think) were slower to focus.

but in saying that ..... the speed of focus does not really matter for landscape imagery, Also in terms of the two lenses suggested - the Canon lens allows you to use filters which is of benefit if you use a ND grad filter.

Gregor Samsa

PCPhoto wrote: »

difference between 8mm and 10mm would be fairly negligible.

Actually, the difference between 8mm and 10mm is quite a bit. You wouldn't notice the difference between 100mm and 102mm, but at the ultra wide end, every mm counts.

I don't have a Canon and I've never used the Sigma 8-16, (I do have the Sigma 10-20 for Sony mount) so i can't comment on the specific lenses.

What I will say is that no-one really uses a ultra wide lens at the long end, so all other things being equal, go as wide as you can.

M5

8MM




10MM


The reviews of both lenses seem solid, the sigma can produce excellent images in certain conditions, its quite slow though and a flash is not an option

Cant make up my mind

Gregor Samsa

M5 wrote: »

and a flash is not an option

Built in pop-up flash will certainly cause problems:



But a bounced mounted flash will be fine:



(10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC [non HSM version] on a Sony Alpha 100 - both pics at 10mm)

Gregor Samsa

By the way, if you're willing to sacrifice a bit of the width for a faster lens, there's also the Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8

Photozone's review says "The Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX is currently the best ultra-wide angle zoom lens for Canon EOS APS-C DSLRs.", although that was 2008, so things may have changed. I know people on a Sony forum I frequent rave about it, but i've never used it.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/379-tokina_1116_28_canon

M5

phutyle wrote: »

Built in pop-up flash will certainly cause problems:

http://www.thisismydna.com/photos/DSC03333.jpg

But a bounced mounted flash will be fine:

http://www.thisismydna.com/photos/DSC03048.jpg

(10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC [non HSM version] on a Sony Alpha 100 - both pics at 10mm)

What the heck happened to your kitchen :eek:

phutyle wrote: »

By the way, if you're willing to sacrifice a bit of the width for a faster lens, there's also the Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8

Photozone's review says "The Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX is currently the best ultra-wide angle zoom lens for Canon EOS APS-C DSLRs.", although that was 2008, so things may have changed. I know people on a Sony forum I frequent rave about it, but i've never used it.

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/379-tokina_1116_28_canon

Yeah, the speed of that is tempting alright. Really need to get my hands on all three

Gregor Samsa

M5 wrote: »

What the heck happened to your kitchen :eek:

Very breezy day, back door open. We opened the front door, and a wind came throughout the house and slammed the dining room door closed, shaking the partition wall, and making a wall cabinet full of glass hop off it's brackets and into the pile you see on the floor.

Is 2.8 really necessary on a wideangle? Presuming it'll be used mostly for interiors and landscapes, surely you'll be mounting it on a tripod or shooting from f/8 and upwards anyway?

M5

phutyle wrote: »

Very breezy day, back door open. We opened the front door, and a wind came throughout the house and slammed the dining room door closed, shaking the partition wall, and making a wall cabinet full of glass hop off it's brackets and into the pile you see on the floor.

wowzer!

Deleted User wrote: »

Is 2.8 really necessary on a wideangle? Presuming it'll be used mostly for interiors and landscapes, surely you'll be mounting it on a tripod or shooting from f/8 and upwards anyway?

Fair point, soft focus with a wide angle shot might look weird

Borderfox

f2.8 on a wideangle is more handy than you think

M5

Borderfox wrote: »

f2.8 on a wideangle is more handy than you think

do go on...

Handy in low light i guess!

I think borderfox uses his for weddings and group shots and such, where he might be stuck hand-holding the lens. If you're planning to do landscapes or interiors, then I'd imagine you'd be tripod mounted a lot of the time and shooting with shutter speeds that are a couple of seconds long.


I use the 17-85 IS lens, and I've never been in a situation where 17mm wasn't wide enough for a group shot (so much so, that I've often brought a 30mm prime with me and gotten away with it without needing to 'zoom out' at all).

It really depends on your intended use, I guess.

jaybeeveedub

I used the sigma 12-24 ex dg hsm for years over the canon prime until the mkII came out.... It was an excellent lens, both on 20D and later 1Ds mkII