What is the best ultra-wide zoom for cropped sensors

That new 11-24 Canon looks a bit good

"daleg" is presumably referring to the fisheye Samyang/Rokinon 8mm. I have one and have gotten decent results de-fishing it. My unscientific estimate is that the de-fished image covers the equivalent of 6 to 7 mm on my 70D. At f/5.6 or f/8 image sharpness in the corners is good but probably not as good as an ultra-wide zoom such as the 10-22, 10-18, or similar.

Edited to add some samples I took at the "Place of Refuge" on the Big Island of Hawaii a month ago. Although it is not visible in the samples, I noticed a slight loss of sharpness at the corners in the de-fished shot. But it is not visible when I view the picture full-screen on my 2560x1440 monitor, only when I pixel-peep at 1:1. The first is the de-fished Rokinon probably at f/8; the second is the 10-22 @10mm, f/8.

Heya,

Woke up this morning, to my local west coast Florida mud-hole town of Cedar Key.

10-22 on the camera. Went for a morning long exposure session. Thanks to the lens being able to take standard filters, using big ND filters are a cinch and don't require a bunch of jazz or hassle. I just loaded my plates with my 10 stop filter & 3 stop graduated soft edge filter, and went for some 30 second day light exposures.

Here's the performance of the 10-22 at 10mm and F11, with stacked filters and without (should be obvious which is which) to give you an idea about this kind of performance through filters, if you care about that.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qDZH​S3

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/ryGN​Co

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qDZK​wL

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rjr5​QJ

Do any of you who are talking about flare have any shots you can post as a comparison to show what you're talking about and referring to. To me when I hear "flare" I picture a sun flare going across the lens when a lens hood isn't present or isn't doing it's job.
Thanks for any examples.

treebound wrote in post #17473832
Do any of you who are talking about flare have any shots you can post as a comparison to show what you're talking about and referring to. To me when I hear "flare" I picture a sun flare going across the lens when a lens hood isn't present or isn't doing it's job.
Thanks for any examples.

There is good flare, bad flare, and no flare.

Good flare, to me, is when you are trying on purpose to get some star spikes from a light source, big ones, like when stopping down to F16 or F22 on the sun and going for spikes. But you still want controlled flare, and not tons and tons of reflections of the elements all over. Just the spikes. That's tough for a lens.

Bad flare is when you pretty much get to see the internal elements reflecting all over the place, so you get tons of artifact geometric blobs and bubbles of flare every where. Tokina does this hard unfortunately.

No flare is of course the "ideal" in many cases (personally I like some star spikes!), but 100% flare handling doesn't exist. But getting really close to having no unwanted flare is the ideal and some lenses are pretty good at this (17-40, 10-22 are not super expensive and handle flare very well).

Examples of spikes & bad flare:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/p15v​i8

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pLeG​Jr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oveh​Yj

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/ojZf​EK

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oqV1​jQ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oinY​mC

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/qyZX​4s

Thank you very much, that really helps my comprehension.

Recently got a refurbished Canon EFs 10-18. Haven't shot much outdoors with it yet but here's a couple of indoor samples.

For use with filters the Canon 10-22 is the best all around, but can suffer from not being the sharpest and horrible CA at 10mm. The Tokina 11-16 or 11-20 would be best, but the flare is really bad.

For use without filters the Sigma 8-16 is the best. It has nearly zero focus breathing, very sharp to the corners even at 8mm, decent flare control, and massively better microcontrast than any other crop UWA zoom lens out there. Really should have an Art sticker put on there.

A a few of the photos on my website were taken with the 10-22 if you wish to check them out.

Hi All

So I had an interesting experience. First and foremost, I had a budget, and a new 10-22 was way over.
I then located a store that had a
10-22 used
Sigma ultrawide zoom used
and a new 10-18mm

I shot with all 3, and the 10-18mm kicked their buts, edge to edge sharpness. That coupled with being new and the fact that my wife bought it for me, I took the new 10-18mm.

This lens is very good! After all the great comments and help in this thread, feels odd that I opted for the new lens, but I couldnt ignore the test shots, and my budget. I am a very part time landscape photographer, so didnt want to overinvest.

Here is a pic I just took outside my house, with the sun and everything. straight out of camera. 10mm, Sorry its badly compressed, Im not at home. But edge to edge sharpness is incredible.

The Canon EF-S 10-22mm I felt couldn't be beat since it's the best at handling flairs. pick up a used copy like I did. I got it since I was looking for a UWA for when I go to Vegas next month. It's been on my camera the most since I got it about a month ago.

My first attempt at a sunset with my lens
Got lots to learn!

Basically 2 exposures, ND filter.

And Another one
Not bad for a 250 Dollar lens

I once decided to pick up a wide angle lens and I haven't regretted my decision to get the Canon 10-22. I originally picked it up to photograph a resort. It does fantastic for interiors! I have since made twice what I paid for the lens just photographing real estate. (I don't get much work as I'm quite busy with nursing school). I also love it for landscapes. However, 9 times out of 10 I'm shooting at 16mm+ because 10mm outside really is too wide. If there is a particular subject (rock or building) that you are trying to capture, at 10mm it looks tiny. I love to have the option though and as I mentioned before, it's perfect for tight spaces. It's also interesting to play around with the perspective of people and pets at the wide angle. I have since upgraded to a full frame but keep the crop body around for the added reach with my zooms as well as to use with this lens. Here are a couple of shots I've taken with it.
@16mm

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …897858575/in/ph​otostream/

17 master bedroom

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …896864251/in/ph​otostream/

5 living room

nazmo wrote in post #17486845
My first attempt at a sunset with my lens
Got lots to learn!

Basically 2 exposures, ND filter.

Hosted photo: posted by nazmo in
./showthread.php?p=174​86845&i=i115235410
forum: Canon Lenses

nazmo wrote in post #17486888
And Another one
Not bad for a 250 Dollar lens

Hosted photo: posted by nazmo in
./showthread.php?p=174​86888&i=i116454132
forum: Canon Lenses

Nicely done, not much to learn, simply more to capture.

Very best,

Thanks MalVeauX!

I still want to create images to the calibre you posted! need to scout some more locations. The beach was fairly limited, had to use the rocks.
With winter coming, Im hoping to get more dramatic skies as well.