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 24 Jul 2012 (Tuesday) 10:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What ultra wide should I pick up?

 
jdhill
Member
Avatar
232 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:26 |  #1

I recently made a trip to Colorado and realized my 18-135 wasn't wide enough to capture the beauty of the Rockies - had to resort to pano.

I've been researching some ultra wide lenses, but am wondering if a 17-40L would be wide enough. I'm stuck between the 17-40L and 10-22, but am also open to hearing what everyone has to say about the offerings from Sigma and Tokina. With my budget being $600, what's my best option?

I'll be using this lens for Chicago architecture shots as well as landscapes shots in future trips to Colorado and Scotland.

Any help and advice is greatly appreciated! :)


John
Feedback

Canon 6D | Canon 24-105mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art | Canon 85 f/1.8 | Canon 70-200 f/4L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,357 posts
Gallery: 209 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4238
Joined Dec 2008
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:28 |  #2

I own the Canon 10-22 and love it. But the Tokina 11-16 is supposed to be a very nice lens as well.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,237 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 1513
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:28 |  #3

unless you are buying a full frame camera to go with that 17-40 its not an ultra wide. Pick another option for your crop camera, like the 10-22.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lvph2
Goldmember
1,909 posts
Likes: 186
Joined Jul 2005
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:32 |  #4

10-22mm on a crop. L quality. Loved it on my Rebel XT when I had it. If I had another crop body, it would be a no brainer.



- Nikon D3300
- Nikon 35mm F/1.8
- Sigma 17-70mm F/2.8-4 Cont.
- Tokina 100mm F/2.8 MACRO

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HughR
Senior Member
Avatar
999 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:36 |  #5

I went through choosing an ultra wide angle for my 60D about a month ago. First of all, 17mm will not be wide enough. After reading everything on the web about the Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, and Sigma 10-20, it became clear that most reviewers rated the Tokina 11-16 as being the sharpest of the three, even out to the corners. In fact, the Tokina was rated sharper than either the Canon or Nikon equivalents. It seemed to me that across the field sharpness was a major purpose of using an UWA, I purchased the Tokina. It is an extremely sharp lens and I love it. I've had no problems with flare, and chromatic aberrations are generally not noticeable but are easily corrected in Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, or Photoshop. It's also about $100 cheaper than the Canon 10-22. Have a look at it, and I think you'll be impressed.


Hugh
Canon 60D, Original Digital Rebel (2003)
EFS 15-85mm IS USM, EF 70-300mm IS USM, Tokina 11-16mm
Speedlite 430EX, Speedlite 430EX II,
Qbox 16 pro, Lastolite EZbox 24x24, Lumiquest Softbox III

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
IanE
Member
216 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Bath, UK
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:36 |  #6

If 18mm isn't wide enough, why would 17mm be?

Canon's 10-22 and Sigma's 10-20 are both very good. Others will point you to the Tokina 11-16, which has the advantage of being f/2.8.


www.ievenden.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZeroSkylineX
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:37 |  #7

If you say that your 18-135 hasn't been much help then why do you suggest getting another lens that's only one focal length wider..? IMO that's pointless, especially for what you want.

I suggest these three lenses:

Canon 10-22 f/3.5-5.6 Overall sharpest and most expensive
Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 or f/4-5.6 On par with the canon, also significantly cheaper
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 Almost the same price as the Sigma f/3.5, best for low light


Canon Rebel 600D/T3i | 580EX II
Sigma EX 10-20mm f/3.5| EX 17-50mm f/2.8 OS| EX 50mm f/1.4| EX 70-200mm f/2.8 II
---
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yourdoinitwrong
Goldmember
Avatar
2,394 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Indiana
     
Jul 24, 2012 10:59 as a reply to  @ ZeroSkylineX's post |  #8

I was deciding between the Tokina 11-16 and the Canon 10-22, ended up with the Canon. It only has 5mm more on the long end but overall it seemed to be the more flexible option. The 10-22 is a great lens, quick AF and very sharp. I liked the f/2.8 of the Tokina but in my use so far I haven't missed having it as I don't use that FL much in low light.


5D4 w/BG-E20, 24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 35 f/1.4L, 85 f/1.8, 100 f/2.8L IS Macro, Sigma 50 f/1.4
Full List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdhill
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
232 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Jul 24, 2012 11:25 |  #9

Thanks everyone for thoughtful comments!

After reading everything here, the 17-40l is out - I just like the idea of owning an L lens

Sounds like I may have to explore the Sigma and Tokina, since they are cheaper in price but not quality. Quick question though, I'll be shooting landscape shots at f/8 and above, so will the Tokina's 2.8 be tht beneficial? I understand it will be quick ad great in low light, but from a landscape perspective, is the 2.8 worth it?


John
Feedback

Canon 6D | Canon 24-105mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art | Canon 85 f/1.8 | Canon 70-200 f/4L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yourdoinitwrong
Goldmember
Avatar
2,394 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Indiana
     
Jul 24, 2012 11:35 |  #10

jdhill wrote in post #14762444 (external link)
Thanks everyone for thoughtful comments!

After reading everything here, the 17-40l is out - I just like the idea of owning an L lens

Sounds like I may have to explore the Sigma and Tokina, since they are cheaper in price but not quality. Quick question though, I'll be shooting landscape shots at f/8 and above, so will the Tokina's 2.8 be tht beneficial? I understand it will be quick ad great in low light, but from a landscape perspective, is the 2.8 worth it?

For your situation I would say the 2.8 is not necessary at all, but there may be a few times it comes in handy for things other than landscapes. You can always check the Sell forum on here or the Canon refurb store to see if you can get a good price on the 10-22 if you still wanted one. I happened to get a killer deal ($659) on a new one last Christmas from B&H.


5D4 w/BG-E20, 24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 35 f/1.4L, 85 f/1.8, 100 f/2.8L IS Macro, Sigma 50 f/1.4
Full List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,184 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2596
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 24, 2012 12:00 |  #11

just pick any of the lenses starting at 10/11/12...or the 8-16mm sigma if you want to get crazy wide...

stopped down to f8, they're all probably really close, and it comes down to what you're comfortable paying..

i have the sigma 10-20mm, because i don't think it's worth it to pay nearly double for the canon


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,108 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Aug 2009
     
Jul 24, 2012 12:10 |  #12

Don't forget the Tokina 12-24F4. It is a sharp lens, and a constant F4. For my purposes, it was fine.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ito
Member
Avatar
169 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Wisconsin
     
Jul 24, 2012 12:16 as a reply to  @ artyH's post |  #13

As a note, there is a new version of the Tokina that should be coming out next month.


Gear: Canon 6D | Canon 7D | Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 | Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 OS | Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 OS | Neewer TT850 Flash x4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 24, 2012 12:18 as a reply to  @ artyH's post |  #14

If you specifically need a f/2.8 go the Tokina, otherwise I don't think it makes much of a difference. I went with the Sigma 10-20 because it was sharp and the least expensive. I am not typically a wide angle person, so I saw no reason to pay more (for me). When I do use one, I typically stop down. Again - stopped down I would think it makes little difference on the choice.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdhill
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
232 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Jul 24, 2012 12:26 |  #15

DreDaze wrote in post #14762605 (external link)
i have the sigma 10-20mm, because i don't think it's worth it to pay nearly double for the canon

I like your thought process here, Dre. Just found a Sigma 10-20 on Craigslist for $350. Sounds like a good price, so I might have to check it out.


John
Feedback

Canon 6D | Canon 24-105mm f/4L | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art | Canon 85 f/1.8 | Canon 70-200 f/4L

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

5,878 views & 0 likes for this thread
What ultra wide should I pick up?
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 amdcasin
1812 guests, 276 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.