Which wide angle/portrait?

Hi guys. I'm trying to decide between a Canon 50mm f1.4, Tamron 17-50, and a Canon 28mm. My budget allows me to get two of them, plus a telephoto lens which I already decided on. I've basically decided that I want the Tamron, so the choice actually only comes down to the 28mm or the 50mm. I'll be using it for everyday things. Do I even need it? I shoot with a 60D. Thanks!

Consider starting out just with your zoom first, and after you've used it a while see which focal lengths you use the most. Then get the prime that is closest to that range.

On one hand the 50 1.4 has a bigger aperture, which is one of the main reasons for using a prime lens. And on a crop, 50mm is a nice field of vision to use for portraits.

On the other hand, for general-purpose use the 28mm is likely to yield a more convenient field of vision on the 60D.

Good advice. Shoot for a while and check EXIF to see what you use most.

What telephoto did you decide on?

Wide Angle?

Hi guys. I'm looking for a nice sharp wide angle lens. I'm deciding between the Sigma 10-20, the Canon 28, the Tamron 10-24, and the Tamron 17-50. I know the last one isn't really a 'wide angle', but it fits into the category of what I need. I shoot mostly everyday stuff, people, objects, etc. with a 60D. I have a 70-300 and a 50mm 1.4 already. Thanks!

Actually 17mm is a wide angle. What you are asking about is ultra wide angles (other than the 28 which wouldnt really be a wide angle on your camera), but terminology aside you are all over the charts. Do you want to go really wide? Or do you want a general purpose wide zoom? Wide angles generally dont treat people well because of the tendency to have perspective distortion if you get too close.

28 isn't very wide on a crop body at all.
The Tamrobn 17-50 is very sharp and one of my favorites.
The Sigma is a well regarded wide angle, the Tam 10-24 isn't regarded as being as sharp.

A great lens that is wide, and even enters the long end of ultra-wide, is the EF-S 15-85 IS. Although pricey, it's range is fantastic for "everyday stuff", and would match up quite nicely with your 70-300. It and the Sigma 17-70 OS are excellent walkaround lenses.

canon 10-22, you wont be disappointed.

i had the tamrom 10-24. for one, it has really horrible chromatic aberration, but thats easily fixed in post, the other issue is that it was very, very soft at 10mm and wide open. lack of sharpness is to be expected wide open but this lens was exceptionally bad. Stopped down it was a good lens.

i had never used the sigma10-22, but i hear nothing but good things and i would steer you to that lens instead.

i can only compare my canon 10-22 to the tamron 10-24, but the canon, and yes twice the cost, literally puts the tamron to shame, its not even a contest.

the canon is my favorite lens and its actually keeping me from going FF at the moment.

mike_311 wrote in post #15016338
canon 10-22, you wont be disappointed.

I second that

I own the 10-22 and love it. I have read reviews of the Tokina 11-16 that say it is better. My take on the 10-22 is that is actually 2 lenses. Ten millimeter is solidly in the UWA zone, with all that implies. The 22mm end is more of a general purpose end of that lens; it is useful in everyday situations. I don't doubt the 11-16 is a superior lens. It just isn't as versatile.

I would suggest you find out what you really want. 2 of those lenses are UWA's, one is a normal prime, and one is a mid-range zoom.

Once you've narrowed your choices down a bit, then you may even be able to decide on your own, if not we are happy to help.

I am considering the 10-22 myself but the more I think the more I realize that I probably don't need it. The reason I mention this is due to the number of different choices you have listed.

I have a 60D and recently bought a used 10-22 on this forum and had some great photos from a trip to China over the summer. I highly recommend the Canon 10-22. When considering this lens, I'd think a lot about what you will be shooting as UWA's do offer some unique perspectives and cool distortions, but they are not as great of walkaround lenses.

yangke wrote in post #15016755
When considering this lens, I'd think a lot about what you will be shooting as UWA's do offer some unique perspectives and cool distortions, but they are not as great of walkaround lenses.

disagree, i went on a cruise to Bermuda and used this lens almost exclusively. Unless i was taking portraits of my wife, this lens never left my camera. the 10mm end is perfect for tight indoor shots and considering one can handhold this lens to 1/20 or even 1/10 and still get crisp images makes it perfect for lower light situations. heck i even used it tdown inside the caves and i rarely had a throwaway due to camera shake. the 22mm end makes it great as a walk around and landscape lens where you want to control distortion, especially considering its on a crop translates it to ~34mm fov.

simply put this lens is very sharp\ and the colors straight out of the camera are beautiful, i was shocked i barely had to push any vibrance or saturation on any of the images.

sure UWAs are great for distortion, but thats not all they are good for.