Please Help (Ultra) Wide Angle Lens

Hi All,

I could do with a little advice. I am travelling for a year and have been looking for a wide angle lens. (While I'm away)

I have a 28mm but on a 300d it’s not that great for landscapes with the 1.6x

What lens would you recommend, I have also heard about the curve some lens put on your landscape shots which I would not want so if you can throw any light on this subject for me I would really appreciate it.

I have been looking at:

Canon 10 – 22mm (does this have the curve?)

And some equivalent Sigma’s and one tamron 11mm

Please help

Paul

I haven't had the opportunity to use the 10-22 but have read and seen some great stuff with it. From what I gather it does come fairly highly recommended. The widest that I have is the 16-35 f2.8 and I love this lens. It is a tad on the expensive side and an alternate would be the 17-40 in this focal range. The 16-35 does not give you the curve in the image that you are alluding to.

EFS 10-22 is out of my reach. So i'm contemplating the Sigma 10-20 or 12-24. Tokina 12-24 is also recommended by some folks here. Recently Tamron's 11-18mm has emerged in the market too.

I've also been following threads on W/A lenses for some time because I'll be getting one in the not to distant future. I think of all the lenses mentioned here, only the Sigma 12-24 can be used on a FF camera body. If you're considering upgrading one day, you might like to know that.

Anyone knows a site that does some tests between the Sigma/Tamron and the Tokina?

I saw the comparision between the Canon and the Tokina but haven't seen anything with the Tamron or Sigma.

Thanks

My vote is for the tokina 12-24! I use it every friday and saturday night at nightclubs. Great performance from it. In this picture the stage is 3 feet off the ground and Kara is 5'6" at $500 its cheaper then the Canon 10-22 EF-S Mount lens. I got my from www.bhphotovideo.com

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I researched and decided on the Toki. Haven't thought about it since. It just does the job.

The Tokina 12-24 is the way to go. the canon 12-24 is a lot more $$ and not any better.

Ricko

Well the Canon may be more $ and "not any better" (others may dispute that) but haven't you mixed things up with the Canon spec?
I thought it was a 10-22mm..........not 12-24mm!
And that 2mm makes a LOT of difference on a 1.6x crop body:
10mm = 16mm on FF
12mm = 18mm on FF

At the wide end,
Canon = 10
Tamron = 11
Tokina = 12

do the extra 1-2mm really make that much difference between the lenses?

After contemplating the same question, I decided on the Sigma 10-20mm. I bought it a few weeks ago and it's been a pleasure to use... I don't know how I survived before without an ultra wide angle lens.

Here is a good article on a number of wide-angle lenses, it's on a website for Nikon users though, whoever they are.

Here's a shot I took the day after I bought the lens -

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

This site has good reviews of the Canon, Sigma, and Tokina:
http://www.photozone.d​e/8Reviews/index.html

Most extreme WA zooms have some curve, which is a design shortcoming, but not generally enough to be noticeable unless you are photographing something very rectilinear like architecture. The lenses which will noticeably curve a horizon line are known as "Fisheye" lenses and are fixed focal lengths.