Multi-purpose wide angle lens?

DreDaze wrote in post #18545280
an 18-135mm could be a good compromise between taking the longer lens...it's a lens included in kits so it can usually be found relatively cheap...you could swap it with your 18-55mm

... and... neither qualifies as wide angle on a crop camera. I use an UWA 11-20mm lens on 80D. It is woefully inadequate when I want/need UWA. The best you can do is the Sigma 8-16, and it will be too long from time to time.

I think a good find 28-70 2.8L would be a nice multi purpose lens, if you have a bit more to spend, a 24-70 2.8L I would be the next level. I used a 17-40L for a while, though it is f4, it has a great iq

My THANKS to everyone on here who have been so helpful. I am going to take a break from searching for awhile. I realized when I went to the camera store yesterday to try the Sigma 10-20 that I really have no idea how to properly use that lens. I took a couple of pictures and some turned out and some didn't. I really don't know enough about the gear I already have to probably use them to the best of their ability, why do I want to add another piece that I will only struggle with? Think I will just take what gear I have on the trip and and the pictures I take are ones I will have. Way too many choices (and a lot of money) and if I spend way too much time trying to figure out how to take a good picture I probably won't be having any fun and neither will the people we are travelling with. Again Thanks to you all for all the help. Jack.

I have made this suggestion before in response to other threads, but I have barely used my Canon 10-22 since getting a Rokinon 8mm/3.5 fisheye. I have had good results using software to "de-fish" pictures when I don't want the distortion. I estimate, without any precise measurements or calculations, that the angle of coverage for a de-fished picture corresponds to something between 6mm and 8mm. The lens is manual focus, but the depth of field is so great that I just leave the lens set somewhere between 5 and 8 feet.

Bassat wrote in post #18545358
... and... neither qualifies as wide angle on a crop camera.

24mm is very much definitely "wide angle" fyi.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18546544
24mm is very much definitely "wide angle" fyi.

On aps-c? Not in my book.

Roofjac wrote in post #18545761
My THANKS to everyone on here who have been so helpful. I am going to take a break from searching for awhile. I realized when I went to the camera store yesterday to try the Sigma 10-20 that I really have no idea how to properly use that lens. I took a couple of pictures and some turned out and some didn't. I really don't know enough about the gear I already have to probably use them to the best of their ability, why do I want to add another piece that I will only struggle with? Think I will just take what gear I have on the trip and and the pictures I take are ones I will have. Way too many choices (and a lot of money) and if I spend way too much time trying to figure out how to take a good picture I probably won't be having any fun and neither will the people we are travelling with. Again Thanks to you all for all the help. Jack.

I would, honestly, consider renting a couple of lenses for the trip and then worrying about purchasing later.

1. The wide angle you've been looking for
2. An 18-135 for most general shooting

The reasoning for the second being that, as already noted, the 75-300 is going to wind up mostly taking up space for being too long. However, the 18-55 is likely to be too short for your normal wandering around, as well. The two trips I've had so far have wound up w/ the 24-105 mounted to the 40D about 70% of the time, the UWA about 25% and the 18-35 1.8 the remaining 5%. My second trip, I figured I'd try getting away w/ the 70-200 2.8, but even it was just generally way too long for most of the views and vistas.

Bassat wrote in post #18545358
... and... neither qualifies as wide angle on a crop camera. I use an UWA 11-20mm lens on 80D. It is woefully inadequate when I want/need UWA. The best you can do is the Sigma 8-16, and it will be too long from time to time.

i think you missed what my post was a reply to...op was talking about what to bring to europe, the 10-20, 18-55, and 50mm were on his list, and was debating on bringing the 75-300mm...hence why i suggested the 18-135mm as a go between...it had nothing to do with wide angle...

also, i think 18mm qualifies as wide angle...anything wider than that is considered ultra wide angle...i think you may be in the minority if you think 11mm is 'woefully inadequate' when you want UWA...i have the 8-16mm, and the 10-20mm...most of the times i'll grab the 10-20mm because it's wide enough...someone coming from an 18-55mm would probably be pretty happy with 11mm on the wide end, it alone would open up more avenues

Bassat wrote in post #18546699
On aps-c? Not in my book.

I did mis-type, I meant to type 28mm Still "Wide angle."

I was reacting to your post which claimed that 18mm is not wide angle on APS-C. 18mm on APS-C = 64 degree angle of view which equates to a 28mm on FF = 64 degree angle of view.

A 28mm @ FF field of view, or 64 degrees on any format is in fact the very definition of wide angle.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18547450
I was reacting to your post which claimed that 18mm is not wide angle on APS-C. 18mm on APS-C = 74 degree angle of view which equates to a 24mm on FF = 74 degree angle of view.

A 24mm @ FF field of view, or 74 degrees on any format is in fact the very definition of wide angle.

I see where you are coming from. My only point was that I wouldn't be in the OP's situation without something significantly wider than 18mm on a crop camera. That's me, though; I like wide. I did a walking/river tour of Chicago last summer with 6D/Σ12-24. Frequently, 12mm was NOT wide enough on full frame. No way I'd be happy with 18mm in Europe.

According to my calculations, 18mm on aps-c is equivalent to 28.8mm on FF (18 x 1.6 = 28.8). I just replaced my trusty 28 1.8 with a Sigma 24A. Not a big difference (in focal length), if you ask me.

Are we are talking about a multipurpose or a wide angle lens? The OP wants both, and one of the purposes is his travel to Italy this summer.

In my experience (extensive travel in Europe) 10mm at the wide lens was more than enough. 24mm at the long lens not nearly enough. When I had a crop camera I most often had my 15-85 in the bag, and sometimes, not always, complemented it with the Sigma 10-20. 15mm was mostly sufficient, but sometimes I wished I had an ultrawide with me.

Whether this 10-20 is good for his other purposes, like astrophotography - unfortunately I have no experience with that.

I pulled the trigger today on the Canon 10-18mm F4 lens today. Local drug store (London Drugs) had it on sale for C$359.99, that is C$70.00 off the regular price. Not the multi-purpose I was originally looking for but it will be great for the holiday this spring. Hoping to get out tomorrow morning and trying it out. I have been playing with it in the house this afternoon and is going to take some practice for sure. THANKS again to all who helped me with the decision.

Roofjac wrote in post #18540934
Hi all. The Tonika 11-20mm f2.8 sounds like the perfect lens but is about $300-$400 above my budget. I will keep looking for something used but not seeing much right now. Thanks again for your insight and ideas.

The Tokina lenses are nice... but unless you are going to be shooting at night a lot or doing photojournalism, you probably don't need the f/2.8 aperture. With typical uses other than those, it's more common to stop the lenses down for maximum depth of field, than to use it wide open.

Instead of a Tokina AT-X 11-20mm f/2.8 DX for $469 (on sale currently, usual price is $599)...

Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM for $279 (on sale, list price is $299). It's one of the most compact, lightweight and affordable ultrawides available. Rather plasticky, but that's part of the reason it's light and affordable. It was the first lens of this type and still is one of the few to have image stabilization, which can be helpful for hand held shooting in lower light conditions (but can't help freeze moving subjects). And its image quality is surprisingly good for such an inexpensive lens. Note, like most Canon non-L-series, the Canon EW-73C lens hood for it is sold separately, $25 (there are also cheaper third party hoods, such as Vello for $12.50). It uses 67mm filters, if you want one. A circular polarizer can be handy for scenic shots, although with ultrawides it can give an uneven effect (B+W C-Pol are among the very best available, for their price: MRC... $60; F-Pro MRC, High Transmissive... $65; XS-Pro Nano MRC, High Transmissive, Slim... $76).

You'll have a pretty hard time finding a new or used ultrawide for much less than the price of the Canon 10-18mm, but...

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for $600 (on sale, + $25 for hood) is quite good too, better built with higher performance USM focus drive. Bigger and heavier, it costs more. Even used, it typically runs $350 or more.

Tokina 12-28mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX is on sale right now for $260 (usually $449). It's a very good lens with excellent built and image quality just a tiny bit below the Canon lenses. It's bigger and heavier than either of the Canon. too.

Tokina 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX II and Tokina 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX are discontinued older versions - superseded by the Toki 12-28mm - that are pretty decent and you might find used. In the Canon mount, there's not a lot of difference between the two versions. Size and weight are about the same as the Canon 10-22mm. I've used one of these Tokina extensively and while it's a nice lens, I like the image quality of my Canon 10-22mm better (it's got less chromatic aberrations in the corners and is one of the most flare resistant of all the ultrawides).

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX II and Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX are discontinued predecessors of the 11-20mm f/2.8. You might find them used and they are a little smaller than the newer lens, but not a lot. Still pretty large and hefty. These are both super sharp lenses, but they also are quite prone to flare problems. Like the 12-24mm above, there's little difference between the two versions in the Canon mount. (In Nikon mount the "II" versions introduce lenses that incorporated an in-lens focus motor a much bigger deal. Other than that there might have been some changes to lens coatings.)

Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM... $399 new (on sale, usually about $650), is decent, but is one of the largest and heaviest lenses of this type.

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM... was a lower priced, somewhat smaller/lighter (but still bigger/heavier than the Canon 10-18mm), but it's been discontinued and is no longer available new. You might find one used. While pretty decent, IMO it's image quality is not as good as either of the Canon.

Tamron SP AF 10-24mm f / 3.5-4.5 DI II... $379 new (on sale, usually $499), has a wider range of focal lengths than most. It's okay, but IMO doesn't have as good image quality as the Canon, Tokina, or Sigma. It also uses lower performance "micro motor" autofocus (as do the Tokina).

Sigma also offers the widest of the wide, an 8-16mm DC. It tends to be more pricey and will show quite a lot of wide angle distortion effects at it's widest focal lengths.

Sigma also offers a 12-24mm, but it's actually a full frame capable lens (DG), so is bigger, heavier and more expensive.

Many of the sale prices above are likely in response to Canon introducing the EF-S 10-18mm a year or two ago. At the time you couldn't find a new ultrawide for much less than $450 or $500... then Canon offered the 10-18mm for under $300... and it was smaller, lighter than any of them... plus it was the first to have image stabilization! And it had as good or better image quality than most, too!

Since then Nikon has introduced a similarly priced Nikkor 10-20mm (with stabilization).... and all the third party ultrawide lens makers have had to reduce their prices.

I haven't followed the used prices closely, but no doubt those have also been effected by the Canon 10-18mm (and the Nikkor 10-20mm) budget pricing.

I have all FF cameras now but I still miss the 7D, 15-85mm as the perfect walk around lens and 10-22mm for wide angles. It may be just nostalgia as my first DSLR equipment but the picture quality of these APS-C lenses is better than their cost would indicate, especially at used prices, and the build quality was quite good too. The 10-18mm was a nice lens too, you made a good choice.

The further down the rabbit hole you go the smaller that number needs to be. Just sayin' If you can afford it of course.

I just ordered a canon 10-20 off the canon refurb site for $399, a bit higher than the others listed here but $200 new retail price. I had a tokina 12-24 a good value for the money, gave it to my kid when He went to college.