| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/29/2005 01:49:55 PM · #1 |
I'm considering getting a wide lens to complement my current lenses (24-70 and 70-200). I've been reading a bit on the 14mm choices, and would now appreciate some advice. The sigma 14mm for canon seems to be getting decent reviews, but some mentioned flare issues, particularly when the sun is high in the sky.
On a 20d body, would 14mm be wide enough? (equivalent 21mm, if I'm not mistaken).
Should I be looking at a fisheye option instead?
Many thanks beforehand.
-Rob
Message edited by author 2005-06-29 13:50:52.
|
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:00:25 PM · #2 |
I'd recommend the Tokina 12-24, wider than the Sigma, excellent reviews on optics. Plus it's not a fisheye so no defishing with the computer and you can even put filters on the front. The only thing is that is that is that it has CA. Canon 10-22 is a good option as well but costs more.
|
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:04:12 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by rgo:
I'm considering getting a wide lens to complement my current lenses (24-70 and 70-200). I've been reading a bit on the 14mm choices, and would now appreciate some advice. The sigma 14mm for canon seems to be getting decent reviews, but some mentioned flare issues, particularly when the sun is high in the sky.
On a 20d body, would 14mm be wide enough? (equivalent 21mm, if I'm not mistaken).
Should I be looking at a fisheye option instead?
Many thanks beforehand.
-Rob |
the crop factor on the 20d is 1.6, so your 14mm would be 22.4 in 35mm equivalent. Flare on wide angle lenses is always an issue because you can't use a very big lens hood or it will end up in the frame. 22.4mm is quite wide...wide enough in my opinion (I use a 12mm which on a Nikon is 18mm equivalent and it's goofy wide). the fisheye is fun, but very distorted. yes you can correct in software, but it's a lot of work and not 100% accurate. if you're just looking for a decent wide angle, 14mm should do you fine.
The Canon 17-40mm L is an awesome lens, as is the Sigma 12-24mm. you may be happier with a bit of zoom rather than the fixed 14mm; you have a lot more flexibility, though you might lose a few stops of light and maybe some sharpness (not usually an issue with wide angle shots anyway).
P
ps edit: oh yeah...and Yido says the Tokina is good too :)
Message edited by author 2005-06-29 14:04:53. |
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:15:02 PM · #4 |
I love my Canon 10-22mm. Mega wide angle without too much distortion. There does seem to be a bit of a quality issue, however. I had to send my first back as it was soft at one side.
|
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:17:40 PM · #5 |
| i have the 17-40 and it's cool, but if i had a 20D, i'd have the 10-22 like, yesterday. ;) |
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:19:19 PM · #6 |
I have the 14mmL 2.8, it's without doubt the best lens for interiors and for architecture but it's a thad to distorted for "humans".
the 14mm is a spectacular lens but with very very limited applications
If I were to recommend a lens, I would say the 16-35L 2.8 or at lower cost the 17-35xrdi from tamron,,,it is AS sharp as the Canon but with 2 issues, very slow to focus and variable aperture. if you can live with variable aperture then you have to check that lens out.
|
|
|
|
06/29/2005 02:25:01 PM · #7 |
I'd highly recommend the tokina 12-24 f4.
I just got mine a couple days ago and am absolutely amazed at what this thing can do..especially at the price. The optics are just as good, and in some cases better, than its competitors.
Popular Photography reviewed the lens recently and gave it lots of praise: //www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1349
I got it for $468 at beachcamera.com ... can canon, or sigma do that? |
|
