Wideangle on 7d

I swear by my 17-40 f4L! Its not as wide as the 10-22 (which I have owned in the past), but it costs the same $$ for better glass and a better build.

It is also has a longer reach so it can work as a walkaround as well.

i have the tokina 12-24, but i would say the 11-16 would get my vote, as thats the wide i want.

I am looking for a UWA. Maybee the 11-16. I do want a lens with 2.8

J_O_S_H_U_A wrote in post #12901231
I swear by my 17-40 f4L! Its not as wide as the 10-22 (which I have owned in the past), but it costs the same $$ for better glass and a better build.

It is also has a longer reach so it can work as a walkaround as well.

The 17-40 is a wideangle lens ONLY on FF. 17mm on the wide end on a crop is barely within the area one could call "wide". A kit lens is more or less as useful as a wideangle as that thing. If one were to need a normal zoom for a crop body, the Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS or the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS would be the two best choices. Don't get me wrong, the 17-40L isn't a bad lens, not by a long shot, just that on a crop body there are better options.

+1 vote for the Tokina 11-16. Almost never leaves the 7D

Loved my 11-16 when I had it!!

Todd Lambert wrote in post #12898867
Zeiss 21 or Canon 24L.

Love me that Zeiss 21, I have yet to try the canon 24mm, but I already have use of the 24-70 F2.8L

beerba wrote in post #12901294
I am looking for a UWA. Maybee the 11-16. I do want a lens with 2.8

If you really need f2.8 then you'll have no choice but to put up with the problems with flare, chromatic aberration and the limited focal range of the Tokina 11-16. But why do you want an UWA lens with f2.8? If it's because you're planning on using the lens for dark interiors where flash isn't permitted, or for shooting wide-field astronomical stuff then, yes, you do want f2.8 and the 11-16 is the correct lens.

But if you want f2.8 because you believe it'll result in big differences in depth of field from f3.5, then you'll be disappointed. At 11mm your hyperfocal distance is just 226cm at f2.8; most of the time your DoF will be infinite.

I own the Tokina 11-16 and the Canon 10-22; I have full-time access to the Sigma 10-20. The Tokina is only used for astro stuff, the Canon for everything else and the Sigma sits, unused, in my friend's bag.

i think you are going to get a fan club for all the lenses you are looking at, what ever call you make your on a good thing. pick your needs, pick your budget and make your choice. i love my 11-16 thats just my point of view.

Two years ago while looking for an Ultra Wide Angle lens, the choices for me where the Canon 10-22 and Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. For me the extended range was more important than f/2.8 as I was using it primarily for landscape/ cityscapes. Less need for swapping lenses at times also.
Soon after that the Tamron 10-24 was hitting the streets in the market place.
I don't know if there is a real 'Clunker" in the UWA lens market. The Canon, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina have really given all of us tough decisions.

The Devil wrote in post #12901586
The 17-40 is a wideangle lens ONLY on FF. 17mm on the wide end on a crop is barely within the area one could call "wide". A kit lens is more or less as useful as a wideangle as that thing. If one were to need a normal zoom for a crop body, the Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS or the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS would be the two best choices. Don't get me wrong, the 17-40L isn't a bad lens, not by a long shot, just that on a crop body there are better options.

Technically, the 17-40 is indeed a wide angle on crop. I believe the confusion here lies between wide-angle and ultra-wide-angle. Which is why I recommended a 21 or 24mm lens - as those are wide angle lenses. The title is a bit misleading on this thread but the OP has clarified that they're actually looking for a UWA instead.

Well true, the wider end can be called a wideangle, but I generally assume people want an UWA, when they say wideangle, 'cause that generally does seem to be the case.

watduzhkstand4 wrote in post #12899737
I absolutely love my Tokina 11-16

Plus 1...IMAGES

Interesting suggestions.. would most of you guys also take the Tokina 11-16 over the Canon 10-22?

Kaleidoscope wrote in post #12904088
Interesting suggestions.. would most of you guys also take the Tokina 11-16 over the Canon 10-22?

Having both lenses, then certainly yes