Canon Wide Angle Lens Advice - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/23/2008 05:47:45 AM · #1

I'm wondering if anyone uses the Sigma 10-20 and if so if they would give me some feedback on the lens' performance.

I recently used

MAK's 17-40 F4 L lens and soon realised how my kit missed a wide angle, I have the 28-80 L lens that I bought from him a while ago but could still use a wider one. I then started looking around and it kind of dawned on me that the 10-20 would give me a wider angle as well as less overlap than the 17-40 would but other than the amazing shots in the lenses category I have no first hand experience of it.

Hoping someone can offer some advice :)

Oh not that it's massively important but anyone that is able to give some feedback can you let also let me know if you are using it on a FF or cropped sensor please.

TIA

ETA: Actually any comments on other choices of wide angle lenses worth considering would also be very useful.

Message edited by author 2008-10-23 05:56:22.

bobonacus

Canon EOS-7D

10/23/2008 06:23:49 AM · #2

sima review

canon review

I went for the tokina 11-16 mainly because the reviews I've seen for the canon and sigma lenses were not great (not that there were any reviews for the tokina!) and the tokina is f2.8 throughout the range

example

Message edited by author 2008-10-23 06:29:00.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

10/23/2008 06:31:15 AM · #3

I have the Canon 10-22 but to be honest I really didn't investigate any of the others. Robert (

Bear_Music) let me borrow his when I visited and I ended up liking it so much I bought one from his camera store guy. Love it. It's on my camera almost as much as my primary lens.

10/23/2008 06:31:15 AM · #4

They look great Bobonacus, I will take a look in to the Tokina as well as keep an open mind on the others

Thank you :)

ETA: Oh I see this lens is for Cropped frame sensors only that's a shame as I intend to go FF (as mentioned below) within the next 12 months.

Message edited by author 2008-10-23 06:37:27.

10/23/2008 06:33:00 AM · #5

Originally posted by Melethia:

I have the Canon 10-22 but to be honest I really didn't investigate any of the others. Robert ( Bear_Music) let me borrow his when I visited and I ended up liking it so much I bought one from his camera store guy. Love it. It's on my camera almost as much as my primary lens.

The 10-22 is EF-S though I believe?

I did look at it briefly but as I will be intending on going full frame fairly soon (within 12 months anyway) I would like to keep any new lenses with that thought in mind.

Thanks for the input though Melethia

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

10/23/2008 06:38:34 AM · #6

Yep, EF-S. And probably the reason I'll stay cropped frame, so I can keep using that lens. Well, that and I ain't good enough for a full frame camera, but I like being able to use it as an excuse. :-)

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/23/2008 06:44:27 AM · #7

Originally posted by Melethia:

HAHAHA! I have just had a brief glimpse through your port (realised I had looked before in much more detail), not good enough for FF is just not an excuse I think you can carry off! Wonderful port you have.

bobonacus

Canon EOS-7D

10/23/2008 06:54:34 AM · #8

Correct me if I am wrong, but the 16-35L or 17-40L on a FF are going to be virtually the same angle of view as the cropped 10-22, 10-20, 11-16 and the quality is going to be better.

I realise you want something that will do both but you could but a cropped wide angle now and sell it when you go to FF ...

10/23/2008 07:10:29 AM · #9

Originally posted by bobonacus:

Absolutely agree with you they will be almost the same on the FF as the 10-20 etc would be on the cropped, What I am trying to weigh up really is whether to go for a wide angle lens for the cropped sensor that will be Ultra wide when I get the FF, although I am still considering the 17-40L as that felt awesome and certainly produces quality images and will get by now on the 1.6 cropped sensor and be awesome when I get it on a FF.

ETA: The above is also quite a strong point in favour of the Sigma 10-20 as this works (I believe) on all sensor sizes.

Message edited by author 2008-10-23 07:12:45.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

10/23/2008 07:17:07 AM · #10

I think given your eventual move to FF, the 17-40 might be just what you need. I'd say go for it. :-)

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

10/23/2008 10:50:32 AM · #11

Originally posted by Melethia:

I think given your eventual move to FF, the 17-40 might be just what you need. I'd say go for it. :-)

I agree this might be the sensible move in the long term, although I wonder just how wide the 10-20 would look on a FF that must be quite impressive.

I do have another lens on my wishlist which is the 15mm fisheye or possibly the 14mm Sigma version but really want the wide lens first.

If anyone else has advice / criticsm on any of the lenses mentioned please let me know, buying a EF-S lens and selling it on when I go FF might be an option although I would prefer to choose a great lens now and not have to replace it with something else later as I upgrade the body.

Patrick_R

Canon EOS-60D

10/23/2008 11:24:50 AM · #12

get the 16-35 when you go FF it will be the same FOV then the 10-22. Besides that it's also a faster lense. I'm not a big fan of the 17-40 due to the fact that it sits inbetween to usable lenses and it's only an f/4. I would rather have the 16-35 2.8 and the 24-70 2.8. Everything in my bag from now on is going to be 2.8 or faster. Of course I want it for indoor weddings though. Those Iclandic photographers and their perfect light and their man summoned clouds seem to enjoy that lense and their 5d's though.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/23/2008 11:43:12 AM · #13

Originally posted by Patrick_R:

I would echo a few things said in the past posts. First, the 10-22 on a crop sensor and a FF sensor is probably like two completely different lenses. 10mm on a full sensor has got to be approaching the realm of a super specialized lens. Second, you could purchase the 10-22 now and then sell it when you upgrade. It keeps its price well and you could consider the money you lose to simply be "rent". Finally, although the 16-35 is a good lens, unless you really need that speed, the 17-40 is every bit as good for much less money. You don't need the 2.8 for handheld at those focal lengths and if you need to capture movement, how many times is one stop going to be exactly what makes the difference in freezing the action and having motion blur? Perhaps its what I shoot, but I have never seen the draw of the 16-35 unless it is night landscapes.

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

10/23/2008 11:44:13 AM · #14

17mm is pretty wide on a FF sensor. 16mm is a little wider. Do you need 2.8 fast or is F4 good enough for what you do? I looked once at the Sigma 10-20 and I think the Tokina 12-24. I decided against them because of the vignetting I already get at 17mm. My 24-105 gets dark edges at 24mm. I could only imagine what it would be like at 10 or 12mm. Also, if you like to use a polarizer you have to spend more and get the thin ones for wide-angle lenses or you will see it in the corners. I get this at about 30mm +/- with standard polarizers. Just more corrections in PP that I don't need.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/23/2008 11:52:03 AM · #15

Everyone seems to forget about the Sigma 12-24, which is a full frame lens.

brownsm

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/23/2008 11:55:38 AM · #16

one thing to consider, and I'm surprised no one's mentioned this yet. The EF-S lenses can't be used on a full frame camera like the 5D. the optics are designed specifically for the cropped camera, and will interfere with the mirror operation on the FF camera. Not a good thing.

I previously had the Tokina 12-24 for use on my 20D. It was a fantastic lens. When I upgraded to the 5D, I tried that lens on it (it doesn't have the interference problem like the Canon 10-22 does). It certainly is wide. But, the image is enclosed by a black circle. Talk about vignetting. Not surprising since that's the way the lenses are designed to work. I could still use the lens, and the vignetting became tolerable just around 17mm. So, I sold that lens and bought the Canon 17-40 for my 5D. A sweet combination (and is a little wider than the 12-24 was on the 20D).

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/23/2008 11:57:57 AM · #17

Originally posted by brownsm:

one thing to consider, and I'm surprised no one's mentioned this yet. The EF-S lenses can't be used on a full frame camera like the 5D.

Somebody did ;-P

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

10/23/2008 12:39:18 PM · #18

I have the 12-24 Sigma

It is uber-wide on the 5D FF sensor, but performs nicely.