Pancake isn't quite wide enough...

So I have the 40mm Pancake lens as a lightweight travel lens, while I absolutely love it for it's weight/sharpness, I've found I've lost a lot of shots because it's not wide enough even on my 6D. It's been great for portraits and general shots, but while I've been on holiday I've not found it so easy to get all the shots I want.

So what I want to ask, is what other alternatives should I consider that are small and lightweight yet still up to a good standard? And obviously a little wider?

I currently have:

6D + 650D
10 - 22
24 - 105

I have been considering selling up the 10 - 22 and getting the 17 - 40 as a UWA on the 6D and walkabout lens on the 650 but just can't bring myself to do it as I've used the 17 - 40 and prefer the 10 - 22! The only other option I can think of would be the 20/24L and I'd still get 32 and 28mm effectively on crop.

Any other thoughts from you guys?

What are you trying to shoot? Why not use your 24-105 or 10-22 when the 40 is not wide enough?

How much wider do you need to go? 35mm is a popular "general wide" focal length and the 35f2 is a pretty nifty size (though nothing quite goes to the pancakeness of the 40mm) but may be still too wide for your purposes.

If you want something small and manageable, but wider, then consider the rather new EF 28 mm f/2.8 IS USM. I have one, and it's a very compact wide angle. For things not running around, the combination of f/2.8 and IS is very handy.

24mm f2.8 IS is another option. Very similar to the 28mm mentioned above only 15% wider.

there is also the option to take several shots & stitch them together...

Go for a 24 or 28 prime.

I have a 10-22 on my 60D, but in actual use the focal lengths I use are usually around the 14-20 (or about 20-30 on FF) to avoid weird distortions that UWA can produce.

In fact if the scene is static (landscape etc.) then I'd rather do a stitch panorama with my 28mm prime, rather than try to cram it all in with the 10-22 at 10mm.

PH68 wrote in post #16319533
In fact if the scene is static (landscape etc.) then I'd rather do a stitch panorama with my 28mm prime, rather than try to cram it all in with the 10-22 at 10mm.

That makes no sense.

tkbslc wrote in post #16320182
That makes no sense.

The reason is simple... distortion.
At around 10mm the 10-22 can produce some str e t c h e d objects that look weird.
You have to be very careful on composition if any people are in the picture.
If that's your thing, then that's fine.
It's just not mine.

the stretched look is caused by perspective. If you stitch a shot with the same FOV from the same position with a 28mm, the distortion is the same. Try it.

So quite a lot of different views! Good.

Sorry the first post was bland, I was in my hotel and the Wifi there was absolutely awful so it was a bit rushed as it kept cutting out!

It is mainly going to be used for 'landscape' shots of cities and portrait shots of my girlfriend/me, but nothing extravagant where I'm going to take a lot of time to compose a shot. So I want something that is relatively small/lightweight, that I can sling over my shoulder yet still good IQ/shaprness. Also, not TOO wide which is why I was looking in the 20 - 30mm range so that it'll work nicely on both FF and crop. As regards to budget, I'm not to sure what I want/need to spend yet.

IS isn't necessary, if the weather isn't brilliant then I have a small monopod I can stick on to help too, but obviously would be a huge bonus.

Hopefully, that should make things a lot clearer now.

Thanks for all the suggestions already though, I'll start reading up!

I've always liked the 28mm 1.8 on both full frame and crop. It's not Canon's sharpest lens, but by f/2 it very decent and near 2.8 and smaller it's good.
It's not too expensive, relatively light and not a whole lot bigger than the 50 1.8. Build quality is very decent and it has that proper ring USM, unlike the 50mm 1.4 (more like the 85mm 1.8).

Have you tried your 24-105L as a travel lens? Bigger I know; but the convenience when you are only bring one lens is really well... convenient.

TweakMDS wrote in post #16329512
I've always liked the 28mm 1.8 on both full frame and crop. It's not Canon's sharpest lens, but by f/2 it very decent and near 2.8 and smaller it's good.
It's not too expensive, relatively light and not a whole lot bigger than the 50 1.8. Build quality is very decent and it has that proper ring USM, unlike the 50mm 1.4 (more like the 85mm 1.8).

Yeah it looks like a good little lens actually. f1.8 would be really handy as well for indoor use too. Although, on a 1.6x it would be 45mm which would probably be a little to narrow if I'm not using the 6D. So might have to look just a little wider like 24 or even 20!

w0m wrote in post #16329522
Have you tried your 24-105L as a travel lens? Bigger I know; but the convenience when you are only bring one lens is really well... convenient.

I have, it's to bulky/heavy to haul around all day for me, especially as I like to lead quite active holidays. So I need something that is light, small and quite concealable too.

What about something like a G15? Given your intended uses it would probably suit much better than a full-size DSLR and lens, and has the versatility of a decent zoom range that goes out to the equivalent of 28mm on FF. All for less than a 28mm IS.