Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 08 Mar 2012 (Thursday) 18:22
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Wide angle to match 17-55 IQ

 
foster2380
Member
228 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Mar 08, 2012 18:22 |  #1

On a recent trip I used my 17-55 on my crop body almost exclusively. I was wishing for an even wider FOV for some mountain/landscape shots.

So my question is what is the least expensive wide angle that will match the solid IQ of my 17-55? I used a friend's Tamron 10-24 and wasn't all that impressed with the very soft corners but I only took a couple shots with it and had never used a lens that wide before or since.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
pulsar123
Goldmember
Joined Apr 2010
Canada
Mar 08, 2012 18:39 |  #2

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 is probably the best UWA in terms of bang per buck.


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

LOG IN TO REPLY
midshipexpress
Member
76 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Mar 08, 2012 19:34 |  #3

I purchased an EF-S 10-22mm after reading reviews that raved about IQ. I haven't been totally impressed with how sharp the results have been, but I should also mention I typically only shoot with it wide open. I need to do more testing, I suppose.


Newbie Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Wilt's Avatar
39,147 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Mar 08, 2012 19:42 |  #4

photozone.de MTF values, using test results obtained with a 15Mpixel camera, show that the Canon 10-22 and the Tamron 11-16mm are NOT very different in IQ than the Canon 17-55mm wide open, only a 5% difference in MTF values reported...not worth considering as a significant difference.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

LOG IN TO REPLY
shahid_
Member
117 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Mar 08, 2012 19:45 |  #5

I have a tamron 10-24 and absolutely love the output.




LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,587 posts
Joined Jun 2009
NYC
Mar 08, 2012 23:17 |  #6

Go for tokina 11-16/2.8. I had the Tokina UWA together with 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200 2.8L IS II. I was very happy with it. Sharpness of the three lenses are comparable at f/2.8. I just don't see any better choice. Color and contrast from Tokina were better than 17-55/2.8 IS. Focus is very fast and ACCURATE. You will see distortion at 11mm tho.


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

LOG IN TO REPLY
The ­ Fox
Goldmember
The Fox's Avatar
1,709 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Jul 2007
Huntington Beach, Ca
Mar 08, 2012 23:19 |  #7

Out of all the UWA on the market, I have used almost all of them and have to say that my 10-22mm is the sharpest and generally all around best. Not to mention that it weights less then all the others.

Nick


"I work from awkwardness. By that I mean I don't arrange things. If I stand in front of something, instead of arranging it, I arrange myself" -Diane Arbus
7D Gripped x2 | 50D Gripped | 17-50mm F2.8 | 35mm F1.4 | 50mm F1.4 | 85mm F1.8 | 70-200mm F4L IS |

LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
hollis_f's Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Jul 2007
Sussex, UK
Mar 09, 2012 05:30 |  #8

I tried the Sigma 10-20 (edit) and found problems with getting both sides of the image sharp - so that was discarded. I currently own the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16. The Canon is easily the best lens for use outdoors in daylight. The Tokina is used only for wide angle night-sky stuff. For use in daylight the difference in flare handling between the two is phenomenal.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
NicuB
Member
82 posts
Joined Oct 2011
Mar 09, 2012 05:33 |  #9

hollis_f wrote in post #14054920external link
I tried the Sigma 10-22 and found problems with getting both sides of the image sharp - so that was discarded. I currently own the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16. The Canon is easily the best lens for use outdoors in daylight. The Tokina is used only for wide angle night-sky stuff. For use in daylight the difference in flare handling between the two is phenomenal.


hollis_f : If I'm permited : Maybe because you did not try the 10-20 :) .

I tried also both 10-20 and 10-22 and the Sigma was better so I took Sigma. I guess it depends on the luck, but both of them are pretty good.




LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
hollis_f's Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Jul 2007
Sussex, UK
Mar 09, 2012 06:29 |  #10

NicuB wrote in post #14054925external link
hollis_f : If I'm permited : Maybe because you did not try the 10-20 :) .

Sorry I mistyped, I did try the Sigma 10-20. It was rubbish.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
oldcanon
Senior Member
406 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Christchurch, UK
Mar 09, 2012 06:35 |  #11

if you want to go really wide on a crop body you should at least audition the sigma 8-16mm. Used with the correct technique it is sharp and wide with very little uncorrectable distortion even wide open at 8mm.

You must keep the plane of the sensor perpendicular though else the parralax convergence is quite astonishing! :lol:




LOG IN TO REPLY
GregoryF
Goldmember
GregoryF's Avatar
2,298 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Magalia, CA
Mar 09, 2012 08:39 |  #12

Funny my Sigma was sharper than the Canon I tried. Chaulk it up to individual lens variance.


6D, 5D, 7D, 50D, 40D, Xsi, PENTAX mx-1, Sony a6000, Sony a3000 too many lenses, flashes and aux. gear to list!:cool:
A simple hobby gone horribily wrong

LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,222 posts
Joined Aug 2007
San Jose, California
Mar 09, 2012 09:30 |  #13

Definitely the best IQ in an UWA is the Canon EF-S 10-22... but of course it's also the most expensive. It's a bit more "plasticky" than most of the third party UWA lenses, but doesn't seem to be any less durable. It is one of the few lenses in this category that has USM focus... But to be fair that's hardly needed because UWA lenses only need to move their focusing elements slightly to achieve focus, and their inherent depth of field hides minor focus error, so non-USM lenses AF performance is virtually identical to USM, in the field.

Most of the UWA's on the market actually are pretty good in terms of sharpness... One thing that sets them apart is how well they handle flare, which is a common issue to have to deal with when using a lens with a very wide angle of view. The Canon lens is unusually good handling flare.

Your other choices:

Sigma 10-20 with the variable aperture... The copy I tried wasn't very good dealing with flare, but otherwise was okay. I have to note that Sigma has revised this lens, so it might be better now. It's one of the cheapest.

Tokina 12-24/4... I found to be second only to the Canon in flare handling, feel it's better built than the Canon, and it's one of the least expensive models. There is a noticeable difference between 12mm and 10mm.... but 12mm has been wide enough for me. This is the lens I bought and am still using, the first version. The Toki 12-24 that's selling new now is a second version, which in the Canon mount supposedly got improved lens coatings (maybe it handles flare even better, I dunno... the changes in the second version for Nikon mount were much more significant, but Tokina seemed to just update the lens in all mounts at the same time). I wanted a fixed (non-variable) aperture, too... and at the time Tokina lenses were the only ones that offered this.

Tamron 10-24mm... Is the widest zoom range of any of the UWAs and sells for about the same as the Sigma 10-20 with the variable aperture, making it one of the least expensive choices. I haven't shot much with this lens, so look elsewhere for more info about it. I have heard that it tends to be a bit soft at the 24mm end... maybe that can be improved by stopping down a bit. I had more opportunity to compare the earlier Tamron 11-18 and wasn't impressed with that lens.... It was a bit clunky and IQ was pretty sketchy.

Sigma 10-20/3.5 (fixed aperture) is a relatively new lens that I haven't tried. It's considerably more expensive, close to the cost of the Canon 10-22. Note that it's the first UWA with fixed aperture available from a manufacturer other than Tokina.

Tokina 11-16/2.8 (fixed aperture) is the fastest lens in the UWA class, the only one with f2.8. It's one of the more expensive models and is a bit prone to flare, but is quite sharp otherwise. The tradeoff to get f2.8 is the very narrow range of focal lengths (along with more susceptibility to flare). Other folks might have reason to want it, but personally I don't see much need for f2.8 on an UWA lens. f4 is fast enough for me on an UWA, especially considering the trade-offs to get f2.8.

Sigma 8-16mm is a very new model and the widest of the UWA lenses available for crop camera. I haven't used it.... It's a little pricey, and be aware that there's a lot of wide angle distortion with such an extreme lens (though not as much as with a fisheye).

Sigma 12-24 is actually a full frame lens... the widest one available in fact (short of a fisheye). It's known to have fairly strong distortions... But, hey, what do you expect with such a wide lens? It's been revised fairly recently, but I haven't used it and can't comment about any improvements. Because it's FF capable, it's also the most expensive of all the lenses mentioined here.

You can see images made with all these lenses in the Lens Sample Archive subforum linked to this forum. Just do a search there, for any particular lens you might be considering.

Below is an image made with my Tokina 12-24 (first version) where I was deliberately trying to cause flare and other issues... I was doing a lot of things "wrong" to find out how the lens handled it...

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6042/6336978529_77fc4f5710_b.jpg
Late afternoon, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Tokina 12-24/4 lens at 15mm and f10, with B+W MRC C-Pol. EOS 7D camera at ISO 200, 1/640 shutter speed, handheld, available light.


Yeah, there were a few things I needed to fix in this image with Photoshop.... In particular, there's some flare in the middle and chromatic aberrations near the edges, along with contrast/color saturation and the exposure level (I had a bugger of a time getting that even close for some reason, but that made the "test" image even more stringent).... But I actually was very pleasantly surprised how little I had to fix, how well the lens handled a "worst case" situation. Below is the image before much of anything was done to correct it...

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6047/6337730854_9e4cfbd008_z.jpg


A detail that shows the flare artifacts more clearly...

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6105/6337729810_216983e9b0_z.jpg

And another detail that points out some of the CA that I needed to correct...

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6093/6337730136_c55b2757dc_z.jpg

It's only an Internet resolution image, but maybe this can give you some ideas what to watch for in other lenses.

Alan Myers "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - EXPOSUREMANAGER (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
RPCrowe's Avatar
7,587 posts
Joined Nov 2005
San Diego County, California, USA
Mar 09, 2012 09:33 as a reply to GregoryF's post |  #14

I use a 12-24mm f/4 Tokina.

I bought this lens before Tokina offered their 11-16mm f/2.8. I am quite happy with the IQ of my Tokina 12-24mm AND the overlap is an insurance factor. When I travel with my 12-24mm Tokina and my Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses (which are my standard travel kit with a pair of 1.6x cameras); I COULD limp along using the 12-24mm as my mid-range zoom if my 17-55mm were ever to go down.

What about my 70-200mm f/4L IS going down? Not in my plans; that guy is built like a tank and I would never expect it to go down. However, if it did go down, I would have a 19.2 to 88mm equivalent between the Tokina and my 17-55mm lenses. Not absolutely great, but liveable!

What about flare on the 12-24mm? I virtually never shoot directly into the sun and always use a hood. I have not been bothered very much with flare and any CA can be corrected to a great degree in post processing.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
foster2380
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
228 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Mar 09, 2012 14:23 |  #15

This is great info, thanks to all who chimed in! I'm still not sure which direction I'll go, it might come down to how much the tax refund is :).




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

2,858 views & 0 likes for this thread
Wide angle to match 17-55 IQ
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00237 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.06s
Latest registered member is hallor
899 guests, 458 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016