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 27 Mar 2011 (Sunday) 08:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens addition: EF 24-105 + Tokina 12-24 or Tokina 11-16 or EF-S 10-22 on a 7D??

 
Roxie2401
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 08:41 |  #1

I'm currently using the EF-S 17-85 kit lens that came with my original 40D and just moved to the 7D. Its still a pretty good lens, has IS and USM.

I'm going to add the EF 24-105 and want to complement it on the wide end. I've read great things about the Tokina 11-16 but also that it's more like a prime and I wonder if I'm better off with the 12-24 or the 10-22 to avoid a lot of lens changing. Is the 11-16 too narrow for general "walking the streets and shooting buildings?"

I like to take architecture and landscape (yes, I know - its a crop body, but....its what I could afford). And, since most of this is outdoors, maybe having both lenses be f/4 is ok?

I've read so many threads and the result is a lot of confusion.

So - how much wide angle do I gain with that additional 2mm (10-22) or 1mm (11-16) vs the 12-24? Is the 11-16 really too short a range?

It also appears that the Tokina's may be better build quality than the Canon 10-22?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
0676joaquin
Member
55 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Austria
     
Mar 27, 2011 08:51 |  #2

why not not look at Canon 17-55 mm 2.8 IS , Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 VC or non VC ,
Sigma 17-50 HSM OS.


40D Tamrom 17-50mm, Ef 85mm 1.8, Ef 70-210mm USM ,430EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Mar 27, 2011 09:13 |  #3

Tokina build quality is better, but 11-16 is too narrow a range for my taste. between the 12-24 and the 10-22, I went 10-22 because its 20% wider, has USM, and better flare and CA performance (flare performance is important to me, I shoot outdoors a lot with it). Whether the 11-16 is too short a range for you is something you have to decide by yourself, no one can help you with that. Nothing wrong with taking landscape or architecture with a crop body, thats why UWA's were made for them.
This was shot with the 10-22, you can see how good the flare performance is, the sun is just out of the frame, and the only spot of flare is that tiny blue bit at the end of the rock ledge that juts out into the water:

IMAGE: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5057/5543795225_361a12a569_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​543795225/  (external link)
IMG_4380 (external link) by noobographer (external link), on Flickr

-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Mar 27, 2011 09:48 |  #4

I also found the 11-16 range to be a bit narrow, and picked the Tokina 12-24 instead. It's a great lens and a very useful range. I've found it to be the perfect complement to my Tamron 28-75.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:09 |  #5

0676joaquin wrote in post #12101675 (external link)
why not not look at Canon 17-55 mm 2.8 IS , Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 VC or non VC ,
Sigma 17-50 HSM OS.

I'll take a look but I already have a 17-85 - I was looking to go a little more on the wider end than 17mm that's why I was thinking in terms of 10, 11 or 12 on the wide end. Thanks for the input - and I do see that what you recommended were f/2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:17 |  #6

Sirrith wrote in post #12101770 (external link)
Tokina build quality is better, but 11-16 is too narrow a range for my taste. between the 12-24 and the 10-22, I went 10-22 because its 20% wider, has USM, and better flare and CA performance (flare performance is important to me, I shoot outdoors a lot with it). Whether the 11-16 is too short a range for you is something you have to decide by yourself, no one can help you with that. Nothing wrong with taking landscape or architecture with a crop body, thats why UWA's were made for them.
This was shot with the 10-22, you can see how good the flare performance is, the sun is just out of the frame, and the only spot of flare is that tiny blue bit at the end of the rock ledge that juts out into the water:
QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​543795225/  (external link)
IMG_4380 (external link) by noobographer (external link), on Flickr


That additional 20% on the wide end was what I was thinking about - of course there is also the + $350 in cost over the 12-24 vs 10-22. And the constant f/4 vs f/3.5-4.5, too.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimmy-j
Member
133 posts
Joined Jul 2008
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:23 |  #7

how about keep your 17-85..

get the tokina 11-16 and get an 85 1.8 prime.

unless you want fast but the 24-105 is not all that fast at f4. one stop to 2.8 makes a big difference if you need it. also note that 24 isn't really too wide on the crop.

i got rid of my 24-105 to get an f2.8 medium zoom. it was a toss up between the tamron and the canon. i ended up getting the tamron and a few primes instead of just he one canon lens and i'm very happy. i am very happy with my current lens line up. the only thing i may change is to go from a 50 1.4 to a 50 1.2L in the future. we'll see.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:26 |  #8

Roxie2401 wrote in post #12102057 (external link)
That additional 20% on the wide end was what I was thinking about - of course there is also the + $350 in cost over the 12-24 vs 10-22. And the constant f/4 vs f/3.5-4.5, too.

Yes the extra money is quite a lot.
But I don't think I've ever used my 10-22 wide open, so the aperture doesn't matter to me :)


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:31 |  #9

jimmy-j wrote in post #12102096 (external link)
how about keep your 17-85..

get the tokina 11-16 and get an 85 1.8 prime.

unless you want fast but the 24-105 is not all that fast at f4. one stop to 2.8 makes a big difference if you need it. also note that 24 isn't really too wide on the crop.

i got rid of my 24-105 to get an f2.8 medium zoom. it was a toss up between the tamron and the canon. i ended up getting the tamron and a few primes instead of just he one canon lens and i'm very happy. i am very happy with my current lens line up. the only thing i may change is to go from a 50 1.4 to a 50 1.2L in the future. we'll see.


Boy, I wish I was near a good camera store. I would love to see what 11-16 looks like vs. 12-24 or 10-22 on the near and far ends of each lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterpat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,520 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 8139
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Orange, CA.
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:32 |  #10

consider the Tammy 17-50 2.8 non v/c


Follow me --> https://www.instagram.​com/shutterpat/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:32 |  #11

Sirrith wrote in post #12102114 (external link)
Yes the extra money is quite a lot.
But I don't think I've ever used my 10-22 wide open, so the aperture doesn't matter to me :)

Do you happen to remember (or have the data) on that shot you posted? How wide was the 10-22 on that one?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:43 |  #12

patrickf117 wrote in post #12102134 (external link)
consider the Tammy 17-50 2.8 non v/c


Thanks - I will look but I was looking to go wider than 17mm on a cropped body.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimmy-j
Member
133 posts
Joined Jul 2008
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:47 |  #13

Roxie2401 wrote in post #12102200 (external link)
Thanks - I will look but I was looking to go wider than 17mm on a cropped body.

i think he meant consider the tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-vc over the 24-105 f4L




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Mar 27, 2011 10:50 |  #14

That shot was actually at 12mm.
I don't know if this helps much, since its a completely different photo, but this is 10mm:

IMAGE: http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5017/5544378550_5a1cf7a8a4_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​544378550/  (external link)
IMG_4296 (external link) by noobographer (external link), on Flickr

Here is a link with better comparisons:
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om …al_length_compa​risons.htm (external link)

-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Roxie2401
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
355 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Western PA
     
Mar 27, 2011 11:01 |  #15

Sirrith wrote in post #12102241 (external link)
That shot was actually at 12mm.
I don't know if this helps much, since its a completely different photo, but this is 10mm:
QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​544378550/  (external link)
IMG_4296 (external link) by noobographer (external link), on Flickr

Here is a link with better comparisons:
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om …al_length_compa​risons.htm (external link)


WOW - thanks for that link - that really gave me a feel for the "field of view."

My first thought was the Canon, maybe influenced by having the body and lens manufacture the same if there was ever an issue between the two - but then I've seen so many great comments about the build, sharpness, etc. of the Tokina's - and the corresponding negative about the Tokina flare issues.




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

6,544 views & 0 likes for this thread
Lens addition: EF 24-105 + Tokina 12-24 or Tokina 11-16 or EF-S 10-22 on a 7D??
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 Guashumerda
807 guests, 195 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.