Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 22 Mar 2012 (Thursday) 06:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-40 along 11-16 tokina

 
mazen
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 22, 2012 06:25 |  #1

Hello,
I am asking too many questions lately : ), sorry if I am flooding the forum with my questions.
my cam is t3i.
I do have 17-40 for landscapes and its great , but there is a little issue, since I have cropped cam , it does not give me as wide view as I want. I still use it and love and satisfied with the pics it gives me. I use it also to shoot things like architectures and bridges .. etc.( I think these are considered in landscape category too, aren't they?)
Would it be reasonable to buy 11-16mm f 2.8 tokina along with my 17-40?
and I think I am going full frame but after few months, say 6-7 months,and I wanna use lenses I have to my new camera in case I buy it.
so does it also work on Canon D5 Mark II or III ( in case D5 mark 3 price goes down buy the time I wanna go Full Frame)?.

Finally, If I buy EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM instead of the tokina, would it work also on Full Frame Cameras?

Thank You and sorry if there is any mistake or unclarity in my questions since I am not an english native speaker.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Subtas
Member
131 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Portugal
     
Mar 22, 2012 06:47 |  #2

Canon 10-22 will not work on full frame camera. Only EF lens. Tokina will work only in the long end but you still get small but hard vignetting. In the short end the image will not occupy the entire sensor.

If you are going to change to full frame in a few months it's not worth buying Tokina imo. And for what you shoot doesn't seem to me that you need the extra stop (f2.8). Just wait, keep the 17-40, buy FF and you'll have your wide photos. :)
But if you have the money, if you really want it, you can sell it later. :)

But yes, with the Tokina your photos will go wide! It's one of my most used lens. Keep in mind that the flare control in Tokina it is very, very bad.. it's the only downside.



5DIII
16-35L - Canon 100 Macro - 35L - 50L - 85L - 135L
580EXII - 430EXII - Odin
http://500px.com/subta​s (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NicuB
Member
82 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 22, 2012 08:41 as a reply to  @ Subtas's post |  #3

You can go with sigma 12-24 if that is in your budget.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tiberius
Goldmember
Avatar
2,545 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Apr 2008
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:00 |  #4

On a crop camera, then 11-16 mm has an equivilent focal length of about 17-25mm. If you are going to be upgrading to full frame, then you'll still be getting your wide angle.


My photography website!PHOCAL PHOTOGRAPHY (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:15 as a reply to  @ Tiberius's post |  #5

Thank you guys for helping me
So EF-S lenses don't work on full frame camera and that's the only kind of canon lenses not working on full frame, am I right?

and for other lenses, how can I tell wether its designed for a cropped or full frame lens?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:16 |  #6

NicuB wrote in post #14131572 (external link)
You can go with sigma 12-24 if that is in your budget.

The Sigma 12-24 is a full frame capable lens. It's also pretty pricey and has some strong distortion effects. But it's the widest lens available for full frame, short of going to a fisheye.

The Tokina 11-16/2.8 is a bit prone to flare. There is also the Tokina 12-24/4, which has less flare, f4 instead of f2.8 (most people stop down UWA lenses) and is usable on full frame to about 18 or 19mm wide before it starts vignetting. However, with 17-40 you already have that covered, so it would be redundant.

Frankly, I'd suggest you simply go ahead and get an UWA if you want/need to shoot wide with your current camera. Just plan to sell off the lens if and when you go to full frame.

There are a number of UWA lenses for crop cameras to choose among:
- Canon 10-22 is probably the best of the bunch for flare control.
- The two Tokina - 11-16/2.8 and 12-24/4 - both are good. I rank the 12-24 second only to the Canon in IQ, better in build, and it's considerably more afforable. It's just not quite as wide.
- Tamron 10-24
- Sigma 8-16 and two versions of 10-20.

Perhaps you have good reasons and a sollid plan, but I also have to question why you think you need to "go full frame" in 6-7 months... There are some advantages to crop cameras, too. And unless you print really large you won't see much difference with or benefit from FF. Not saying don't do it... You might have very good and valid reasons for needing FF. Just think about it. There's an awful lot of hype around full frame, yet it's probably overkill for many people.


Alan Myers (external link) "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) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:16 |  #7

Subtas wrote in post #14131131 (external link)
Canon 10-22 will not work on full frame camera. Only EF lens. Tokina will work only in the long end but you still get small but hard vignetting.

What do you mean by long end and short end?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Subtas
Member
131 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Portugal
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:21 as a reply to  @ mazen's post |  #8

Tokina has 11mm to 16mm reach. 16mm= long end, 11mm= short end.

Canon has EF-S and EF lens. EF can be used on full and crop cameras. EF-S only in crop cameras.
As to others manufacturers (Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, etc) I don't know the designations.



5DIII
16-35L - Canon 100 Macro - 35L - 50L - 85L - 135L
580EXII - 430EXII - Odin
http://500px.com/subta​s (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:23 |  #9

mazen wrote in post #14131768 (external link)
What do you mean by long end and short end?

The "long end" is the most toward the telephoto end of the focal length spectrum, or 16mm in this case (which is still quite wide). "Long" as in the "longest focal length the lens offers". That's vs the "short" end of the range, the shortest or widest focal length of it's zoom range.

The response was telling you the Toki 11-16/2.8 is usable at 16mm on full frame cameras. Any wider setting of the zoom it will vignette pretty strongly. It's not designed for full frame, but is partly usable on it anyway.

The Tokina 12-24 is slightly more usable on FF, over approx. the 18-24mm portion of it's zoom range. This won't do you very much good though, once you get a FF camera, since you already have a 17-40mm lens.

The Canon 10-22 cannot even be fitted to a full frame Canon camera. It has a different mount (EF-S) specifically designed to prevent that.

The Sigma 12-24 is a full frame capable lens, designed to cover FF throughout it's zoom range. Not unsurprisingly for such an extreme lens, it's got some distortion effects (they can largely be corrected in post-production with software such as PTLens).


Alan Myers (external link) "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) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:24 |  #10

amfoto1 wrote in post #14131767 (external link)
The Sigma 12-24 is a full frame capable lens. It's also pretty pricey and has some strong distortion effects. But it's the widest lens available for full frame, short of going to a fisheye.

The Tokina 11-16/2.8 is a bit prone to flare. There is also the Tokina 12-24/4, which has less flare, f4 instead of f2.8 (most people stop down UWA lenses) and is usable on full frame to about 18 or 19mm wide before it starts vignetting. However, with 17-40 you already have that covered, so it would be redundant.

Frankly, I'd suggest you simply go ahead and get an UWA if you want/need to shoot wide with your current camera. Just plan to sell off the lens if and when you go to full frame.

There are a number of UWA lenses for crop cameras to choose among:
- Canon 10-22 is probably the best of the bunch for flare control.
- The two Tokina - 11-16/2.8 and 12-24/4 - both are good. I rank the 12-24 second only to the Canon in IQ, better in build, and it's considerably more afforable. It's just not quite as wide.
- Tamron 10-24
- Sigma 8-16 and two versions of 10-20.

Perhaps you have good reasons and a sollid plan, but I also have to question why you think you need to "go full frame" in 6-7 months... There are some advantages to crop cameras, too. And unless you print really large you won't see much difference with or benefit from FF. Not saying don't do it... You might have very good and valid reasons for needing FF. Just think about it. There's an awful lot of hype around full frame, yet it's probably overkill for many people.

Hummm, what you said made me stop a little and rethink,
My reason is that I have been taking photo for landscapes, I got good photos but I am not satisfied with the wideth I can get from my current camera., and this is why I made my plan to replace my current camera with a full frame, but after reading your post along with the other posts I think I will get one of the lenses suggested and I think I will get the result I want. I got to tell you that I am not proffessional, but a serious photographer,
Thank you so much




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Subtas
Member
131 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Portugal
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:26 |  #11

mazen wrote in post #14131808 (external link)
Hummm, what you said made me stop a little and rethink,
My reason is that I have been taking photo for landscapes, I got good photos but I am not satisfied with the wideth I can get from my current camera., and this is why I made my plan to replace my current camera with a full frame, but after reading your post along with the other posts I think I will get one of the lenses suggested and I think I will get the result I want. I got to tell you that I am not proffessional, but a serious photographer,
Thank you so much

If that is your reason then yes, buy one of the lenses mentioned to go wider. I think you'll be happy and no need to change to FF. :)



5DIII
16-35L - Canon 100 Macro - 35L - 50L - 85L - 135L
580EXII - 430EXII - Odin
http://500px.com/subta​s (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 22, 2012 09:32 |  #12

Thank you so much guys, You helped me a lot with your great, clear answers.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Mar 22, 2012 11:18 |  #13

mazen wrote in post #14131808 (external link)
Hummm, what you said made me stop a little and rethink,
My reason is that I have been taking photo for landscapes, I got good photos but I am not satisfied with the wideth I can get from my current camera., and this is why I made my plan to replace my current camera with a full frame, but after reading your post along with the other posts I think I will get one of the lenses suggested and I think I will get the result I want. I got to tell you that I am not proffessional, but a serious photographer,
Thank you so much

Well, with the right lens you certainly can get a much wider view even with a crop camera. On the other hand full frame cameras are desirable for landscape photography, if that's what you shoot a lot. There are several reasons for this...

1. Landscape photographers might be more inclined to make big prints from their images, compared to some other types of photography. A FF camera will retain more fine detail and image quality when the image is printed really large. If you never print larger than 13x19, 16x24 or perhaps even 18x24, using a crop camera with a good lens you won't see a great deal of benefit from a FF camera. If you are making 18x24", 20x30" and larger prints, a FF camera starts to make more sense.

2. Wide angle lenses are popular with landscape photographers. As you know, a full frame camera will render any given focal length wider than a crop camera will... For example, a 20mm lens on a crop camera is only moderately wide, but the same 20mm is pretty darned wide on a FF camera. This means that lenses for full frame don't need to be as radical design, so potentially may have less distortion.

On the other hand, a kit of crop camera and lenses can be smaller and lighter, not to mention less expensive. Someone who is hiking a lot to get their landscape shots might want a crop camera for this reason. However, the greatest savings of size, weight and cost are among the longer telephoto lenses.

You didn't tell us what camera you're using now. But the 18MP Canon crop cameras are pretty darned capable (they use strong anti-alias filters, so their images need more sharpening, but there is a lot of detail in them once that's done). Several of the earlier 15MP crop sensor models are also very good. The 60D is 18MP and the 50D 15MP, for example.

EDIT: Whoops! My mistake... I just noticed you did tell us you're using a T3i... That's a current, 18MP model with a lot of potential image quality. It's also somewhat compact and a bit lighter than some of the other models.

So, considering what you shoot, you might want full frame... Mostly I'd suggest FF if you plan to make big prints. Or, there may be good reasons to stick with crop.

Now if a full frame Canon does make the most sense for you, next you need to decide which one.

Unless you shoot sports/action too, or often need to work in really low light conditions and want very high ISO capabilities, or have need of in-camera HDR and multiple exposures and some of the Mark III's other key features... There might not be a whole lot of reason to get the 5D Mark III. The 5D Mark II might serve just fine and you could save a lot of money to put toward lenses and such.

The latest Canon 5D Mark III, the earlier Mark II (still a very capable landscape camera!), or perhaps another or even a Nikon model. (Sony has some nice FF models, too... but has far less lens selection than either Canon or Nikon.)

It's a bit heretical I know, but if you print really, really big, need all the resolution you can get, and don't have a lot tied up in Canon gear yet, it might be worth considering the 36MP Nikon D800. It's full frame and $500 cheaper than the Canon 22MP 5D Mark III. This might not make sense, though, if you already have a lot invested in Canon gear. And, I would wager we'll see a higher resolution model from Canon eventually, too (they really don't have much choice, if they want to stay competitve).

Just as a point of comparison - full frame vs crop sensor - see the images below. (I've put these up here on POTN before and regulars will forgive the repetition).

Can you tell which shot was made with a crop sensor 15MP 50D and which was made with a full frame 21MP 5D Mark II? Both were taken with the same lens (Canon EF 20mm f2.8) and the same filter (a 72mm B+W Kaesemann Circular Polarizer). The lens was stopped down a bit in both cases, though slightly different apertures were used...

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5246/5230107928_60877ce02f_o.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7160/6750992383_567e832249_b.jpg
Morro Bay harbor

IMAGE: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2401/5734569759_b596064526_o.jpg
IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7031/6750992403_87f9fb6ca0_o.jpg
Pigeon Point lighthouse

I know it's hard to tell the FF image from the crop camera image at Internet resolutions, even with some tighter crops alongside. You'll just have to take my word that 11x14" prints are equally hard to tell apart. That's the largest I've printed either one so far. But I think either would be fine 16x20" too, possibly even larger.

My point, you have to print big before you start to see very much difference between FF and recent crop cameras. There is some slight advantage of wide lenses on FF cameras possibly having a little less distortion because they can be less radical designs.

Conversely, a crop kit can be less costly overall, or the lower cost of the camera might allow you to put more into good lenses. Plus it might be smaller and lighter, so a little more pleasant to take on long hikes or travelling.

Incidentally, it's a Canon 5D Mark II or Mark III, not a D5 (Nikon designates their cameras D3, D4 and such). But we knew what you meant, anyway. ;)

Alan Myers (external link) "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) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mazen
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Mar 26, 2012 20:09 |  #14

amfoto1 wrote in post #14132505 (external link)
Well, with the right lens you certainly can get a much wider view even with a crop camera. On the other hand full frame cameras are desirable for landscape photography, if that's what you shoot a lot. There are several reasons for this...

1. Landscape photographers might be more inclined to make big prints from their images, compared to some other types of photography. A FF camera will retain more fine detail and image quality when the image is printed really large. If you never print larger than 13x19, 16x24 or perhaps even 18x24, using a crop camera with a good lens you won't see a great deal of benefit from a FF camera. If you are making 18x24", 20x30" and larger prints, a FF camera starts to make more sense.

2. Wide angle lenses are popular with landscape photographers. As you know, a full frame camera will render any given focal length wider than a crop camera will... For example, a 20mm lens on a crop camera is only moderately wide, but the same 20mm is pretty darned wide on a FF camera. This means that lenses for full frame don't need to be as radical design, so potentially may have less distortion.

On the other hand, a kit of crop camera and lenses can be smaller and lighter, not to mention less expensive. Someone who is hiking a lot to get their landscape shots might want a crop camera for this reason. However, the greatest savings of size, weight and cost are among the longer telephoto lenses.

You didn't tell us what camera you're using now. But the 18MP Canon crop cameras are pretty darned capable (they use strong anti-alias filters, so their images need more sharpening, but there is a lot of detail in them once that's done). Several of the earlier 15MP crop sensor models are also very good. The 60D is 18MP and the 50D 15MP, for example.

EDIT: Whoops! My mistake... I just noticed you did tell us you're using a T3i... That's a current, 18MP model with a lot of potential image quality. It's also somewhat compact and a bit lighter than some of the other models.

So, considering what you shoot, you might want full frame... Mostly I'd suggest FF if you plan to make big prints. Or, there may be good reasons to stick with crop.

Now if a full frame Canon does make the most sense for you, next you need to decide which one.

Unless you shoot sports/action too, or often need to work in really low light conditions and want very high ISO capabilities, or have need of in-camera HDR and multiple exposures and some of the Mark III's other key features... There might not be a whole lot of reason to get the 5D Mark III. The 5D Mark II might serve just fine and you could save a lot of money to put toward lenses and such.

The latest Canon 5D Mark III, the earlier Mark II (still a very capable landscape camera!), or perhaps another or even a Nikon model. (Sony has some nice FF models, too... but has far less lens selection than either Canon or Nikon.)

It's a bit heretical I know, but if you print really, really big, need all the resolution you can get, and don't have a lot tied up in Canon gear yet, it might be worth considering the 36MP Nikon D800. It's full frame and $500 cheaper than the Canon 22MP 5D Mark III. This might not make sense, though, if you already have a lot invested in Canon gear. And, I would wager we'll see a higher resolution model from Canon eventually, too (they really don't have much choice, if they want to stay competitve).

Just as a point of comparison - full frame vs crop sensor - see the images below. (I've put these up here on POTN before and regulars will forgive the repetition).

Can you tell which shot was made with a crop sensor 15MP 50D and which was made with a full frame 21MP 5D Mark II? Both were taken with the same lens (Canon EF 20mm f2.8) and the same filter (a 72mm B+W Kaesemann Circular Polarizer). The lens was stopped down a bit in both cases, though slightly different apertures were used...

QUOTED IMAGE
QUOTED IMAGE
Morro Bay harbor

QUOTED IMAGE
QUOTED IMAGE
Pigeon Point lighthouse

I know it's hard to tell the FF image from the crop camera image at Internet resolutions, even with some tighter crops alongside. You'll just have to take my word that 11x14" prints are equally hard to tell apart. That's the largest I've printed either one so far. But I think either would be fine 16x20" too, possibly even larger.

My point, you have to print big before you start to see very much difference between FF and recent crop cameras. There is some slight advantage of wide lenses on FF cameras possibly having a little less distortion because they can be less radical designs.

Conversely, a crop kit can be less costly overall, or the lower cost of the camera might allow you to put more into good lenses. Plus it might be smaller and lighter, so a little more pleasant to take on long hikes or travelling.

Incidentally, it's a Canon 5D Mark II or Mark III, not a D5 (Nikon designates their cameras D3, D4 and such). But we knew what you meant, anyway. ;)



Thank you first for your detailed response;
It helps me a lot to see that I was making wrong idea about what I want to do.
For the pictures differences, I don't see any difference expet how much of the details is covered in the seconded picture, I mean it has wider scene. So I would say its the 5D that has a wider range ; I know this might be a naive response




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Logicus
Senior Member
Avatar
787 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Independence, KY
     
Mar 26, 2012 20:31 as a reply to  @ mazen's post |  #15

FYI, I used my Tamron 10-24mm on my 5D2 and it was good down to 13mm w/o a filter on it. Loved using it on both the 5D2 and the 40d. My 40d and Tamron lens fell, so I got a Sigma 12-24mm since it was good for ff.

It is very sharp all over at f/10ish and up. Distortion is great when you shoot at any kind of angle (pointed up or down). Otherwise perspective correction is in order in PS, unless the extreme angle plays to the composition. Flare is also something to think about and where your lightsource is has to be top of mind when shooting. You can get purple ghosts in the center area and or the miriad of yellow/orange hexagons into a corner. Also, you can not put a filter on the front as it has a permanent metal hood. It has a slot at the back of the lens (facing the sensor) that accepts a ~1"X1.25" gel filter. This limits you to nd or color filters, pretty much, and no ability to use a polarizer. I am currently looking at what I want to do about wide angle... maybe a Canon 14mm f/2.8L II?? We'll see. For comparison, there's a few shots of the Sigma on the 5D2, and the Tamron 10-24 on both the 5D2 and the 40D. I really liked the Tamron, though the Sigma is much sharper closer to the edges.

Shots with Sigma 12-24mm (on the 5DMkII):

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6232/7018850049_467f653f0a_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/7​018850049/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7174/6786012165_0c80cfde2e_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/6​786012165/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7057/6948041235_281039bd8f_c.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/6​948041235/  (external link)

Shots with the Tamron 10-24mm (on 5DMkII):
IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6223/6280849812_e6576b19ef_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/6​280849812/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7168/6671458445_1c8d5e24be_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/6​671458445/  (external link)

Shots with the Tamron 10-24mm (On 40D):
IMAGE: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3228/5870883549_6f5c1b142a_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/5​870883549/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6107/6259555160_2d9196c316_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/6​259555160/  (external link)

My Gear List
My flickr (external link)
My flickr photos organized by Lens Used (external link)

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

3,950 views & 0 likes for this thread
17-40 along 11-16 tokina
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is LaurensW
2218 guests, 298 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.