Looking to go WIDE and in low-light... help

[piku]

Well, its been a year since I got my 300D+kit, packed it w/ a nifty-fifty and a tamron 28-75 XR that is what I use as my walkaround. I'm thinking about getting something that can go wider but as good as my tamron. Any suggestions? ...greatly appreciated

TIA

[Dante King]

16-35 2.8 L

[Olegis]

Tokina 17mm f/3.5 ATX-Pro. Only one stop slower than the Tamron 28-75, has excellent optical and build quality, very small size. Goes to 28mm on 1.6 crop body.

[piku]

oh yah, forgot to mention... it'll be nice if its around the price of the tamron as well =)

[Dante King]

That is going to be hard as even the tamron brand get more expensive as you get wider. how much are you seriously looking to spend?

[Tom W]

Canon 20/2.8 prime.
Sigma 20/1.8 prime.

[the.digital.guy]

16-35 2.8 L
If you have the money!
Other wise:
EF-S 10-22/ A Great Lens!

[piku]

That is going to be hard as even the tamron brand get more expensive as you get wider. how much are you seriously looking to spend?

not as much as a new camera =)

[Dante King]

new 1dsmk2? how much do you want to spend? the small fast primes are real nice bang for the buck!

[piku]

new 1dsmk2? how much do you want to spend? the small fast primes are real nice bang for the buck!

<= $500 w/ tax =) ... i'm in the process of buying a flash unit as well, so it'll depend if i get a 420ex or THE 580ex

[ed rader]

as well as the tamron 28-75.

ed rader

[KevC]

Russian Fishy + M42/EOS mount :)

Check www.dvdtechcameras.com

[Alexandre Gabriel]

<= $500 w/ tax =) ... i'm in the process of buying a flash unit as well, so it'll depend if i get a 420ex or THE 580ex

As usual, BH prices:

Canon Super Wide Angle EF 20mm f/2.8 USM Autofocus Lens - $400
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=12082&is=GREY

Sigma Super Wide Angle 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS - $410
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=217794&is=USA

20mm = 32mm on a 20D. At f/1.8, this Sigma may be a great option!

Hope this helps you.

[piku]

those are great option guys/gals. are there any non-prime options?

[RichardtheSane]

Not at the price you are looking to spend.

fast (F2.8) wide zooms are pricey. How low light can you go and are you willing to up your ISO? you can get the tamron 19-35 f3.5-4.5. Supposed to be an ok lens, but unless you spend the money you won't get the quality of your 28-75.

[piku]

Not at the price you are looking to spend.

fast (F2.8) wide zooms are pricey. How low light can you go and are you willing to up your ISO? you can get the tamron 19-35 f3.5-4.5. Supposed to be an ok lens, but unless you spend the money you won't get the quality of your 28-75.

thats it then. just gotta win the lottery =)

[carlospoolboy]

I would stick to a zoom lens that would allow you some range for framing a shot, a prime lens is sharp and yet limited to its mm. Also, if low light is a factor, I'm sure that you have a sturdy tripod and shutter release cable. Stick to a lens that is not -S, get the best quality you can purchase so when you upgrade the body, the lens will fit nicely. Good luck. -David.

[Andy_T]

Tamron 17-35/2.8-4.0?

Supposed to be a great lens, although with slower focus than the 28-75/2.8 XR DI.

Best regards,
Andy

[RichardtheSane]

Shortly after I posted here I remembered the Tamron 17-35 that Andy just mentioned.
Certianly a very viable alternative and good quality for the price too :)

[piku]

cool. i'll look into that one as well. anyone that owns or have played w/ the tamron 17-35?

[martook]

You could also have a look at the tokina 12-24 lens. It's under 500 dollars (well... not by much though... :) ) and is supposed to be a good lens as well. Not so fast, and probably not as good as the Tamron 28-75, but should be enough I think.

[ed rader]

and it's a highly rated lens and the first WA that has consistently given me the results i want. if you like the tamron 28-75 i think you'll like this lens.

imo, the 17-35 is almost as good as the 28-75 and focusses a bit slower.

ed rader

http://www.fototime.com/91A87712FF36FD3/orig.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/FD2B36EC99422CD/orig.jpg

[piku]

i'm leaning towards the tamron more and more... but before i get a definitive decision, any pros/cons between these two lenses: Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 vs. Tamron 17-35/2.8-4.0 (other than the price difference of about $300-350 of course)

TIA

[Toogy]

If you want W-I-D-E, forget the 17-35, it is not even remotely as wide as the 10-22mm.

[piku]

well thats is true =) ... but 3.5 vs 2.8 is also a difference

[xstrio]

the 17-35 is supposed to have great optics but slow autofocus, under low light this could be a problem

[Andy_T]

f/3.5 vs. f/2.8 is not much of a difference ... it's about 2/3 of a stop.

More important is whether the lens is sharp at this widest aperture. If you have to stop either down to f/8 to get tack sharp photos, this would change the equation.

The Sigma 18-50/2.8 DC has also been reviewed quite favourable here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=79114), take a look at the comparison with the 17-40.

Best regards,
Andy

[tim]

Wide angle lenses are most often used for landscapes, which don't move so quickly, so a slower lens isn't really going to be a huge problem for most people.

Have you considered the kit lens? For around $100 used 18mm is reasonably wide on a 1.6X body.

[piku]

tim--i have the kit lens, just dont like the quality of pics taken by it...just holding on to it till i upgrade later on; makes the 300D a better sell (from the advice i see in these forums)

reason i like to get a lower f/ is that i really-really like taking pics in natural-light / low-light / hardly-any-light ...that and most of them being spur of the moment as well; candid; even shows where flash-photography aint allowed. i have the nifty-fifty but just wondering if i can go wider but sharp as well, while keeping up w/ the subject if need be.

andy--what do you suggest if the f-stop aint that much of a difference?

also, how does the Tamron 17-35/2.8-4.0 compare to the kit lens? (in terms of price/performance, etc... just trying to justify if i do go that route).

thanks everyone, learning a lot =) ...keep it coming

[Andy_T]

andy--what do you suggest if the f-stop aint that much of a difference?

OK, that's just my personal experience ...

I also use the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI as my main lens, but I normally use it at f/3.5 as largest aperture. Reason is that it is definitely sharper there than at f/2.8.

Doing so, so far I NEVER gave a thought at using f/2.8 instead, because the increase in shutter speed would be considerable. Of course, if I had a situation where f/3.5 would be to dark at ISO 1600, I will most likely consider it (or just try to support the camera a bit better).

Still, I find that there is a *definite* difference with my kit lens, which I normally use at f/8 to get nice sharp pictures (although it also is a f/3.5 lens).

Best regards,
Andy

[piku]

oh lol, suggestion in terms of teh wide lens being debated above =) ...thanks for the info on the 28-75 though, i'll try using it more at f/3.5... i usually just use it on f/2.8 or f/8

[Andy_T]

My copy is quite sharp at f/2.8, but VERY sharp at f/3.5 or f/4.0.
Really not much further improvement as I go to f/5.6 or f/8 (apart from DOF, of course).

Maybe yours is tack sharp wide open (if you have a very good copy).

Do some test shots at various apertures ... some people call that 'measurebating', I call it 'getting to know your equipment' :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[piku]

lol... you must really like your "equipment[s]"! =)

[piku]

^TTT

well, it seems that i just bought myself the Sigma 500 DG Super (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=601988#post601948) today. but alas, i have a couple of weeks/months to save up. i am going to chicago for labor day weekend--thats where i really would like to use a WA lens.

are there any new WA lens that are gonna live up to their hype by lets say mid-august?

TIA

[tim]

The Sigma 10-20 will be available soon, no idea how good it'll be.