Wider than 17mm

Having had great advice yesterday, may I ask another question?

With my Canon 7D I want to go wider than my 17-40 allows but without going fish-eye.

Recommendations?

Canon 10-22 or buy a full frame body to use with 17-40.

The 10-22 would be a good option which I would recommend.

Alternatively, I would also consider a cheap manual 14mm which is wide enough on a crop but would be ultra wide when and if you upgrade to a full frame.

Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 or cheaper sigma 10-20 f4.5-5.6 or much loved Tokina 11-16 f2.8 or even tokina 12-24 f4. All these get good reviews and the lens sample page on Lens section can show you shot examples.

Samyang 10mm f/2.8.

On your 7D 15mm is a good general-purpose wide angle focal length. 10mm is not.

You have 3 good lenses which work on full frame. For general photography, 70-300 is a more useful focal length range on full frame than it is on crop. Therefore, if you can afford to, moving to full frame rather than buying a wide for crop would be logical (that is, if the 17-40 is good enough - I don't have it). You could keep the 7D for use with the 70-300 to shoot wildlife, if that's what you do, or sell it.

Not everyone likes focal lengths wider than 24mm on full frame, and your 24-70 is good at 24mm, so if you turn out to be in that category you could sell the 17-40 as well.

To be clear, I don't have any of these particular lenses but am working from published tests and comments online. It may be that the 10-22 on crop is better than the 17-40 on full frame - but, as I said, you mightn't use the 17-40 that much.

Swap out your 17-40 for a 10-22, they fetch about the same on the used market and this will give you better UWA coverage than a prime. Spend your money on bettering your longer focal lengths if that floats your boat.

I also vote in favor of the the 10-200mm lens . Ii is a great lens to use and very light weight.
Get the lens that makes the most sense for the camera you currently have.
Worry about getting a FF lens when and if you have a full frame camera.

melcat wrote in post #16930515
On your 7D 15mm is a good general-purpose wide angle focal length. 10mm is not.
...

Disagree. Vehemently. I have a 60D, 15-85 and 10-22. No way in the world I could do what I do without the 10-22. Try sitting across a table from two people and getting both of them in frame without putting them at the (distorted) edge of the frame. The 15-85 simply cannot do this.

The 10-22 is the master of this distance. On top of being wide enough to get subject in frame, it also has enough width left over to include some of the ambient scene. Another added benefit of the 10-22 is the very deep DOF at wider focal lengths.

Going to full frame will make the 17-40 a true UWA zoom. It does not improve on the 10-22 on a crop. It is: not as wide, slower, vignettes more, and distorts a lot more. Granted most of that is correctable in post. I also shoot a full-frame 6D, and have no interest in a 17-40.

I've said this a bunch of times, and get flack for it regularly. The 10-22 is a better UWA zoom on crop than the 17-40 is on FF. Please, no need to beat me up. I've heard it all before. It is simply one person's opinion, feel free to disagree.

CollegeKid wrote in post #16930580
Disagree. Vehemently. ... Try sitting across a table from two people and getting both of them in frame without putting them at the (distorted) edge of the frame.

Tastes vary, and are changing under the influence of arms-length "selfies", but traditionally a picture of a person taken so close was considered unflattering in Western cultures. (It depends only on distance, not focal length).

And if I do want to take a picture of 2 people sitting across the dining table, 35mm is the focal length I'd use on full frame. The iPhone's focal length, in full frame equivalent terms, is also around 32mm.

You're not the only one to say that, which was why I qualified my comments above. The thing is, if it turns out for the OP to be a little-used range (because they have that terrific 24-70), does it matter so much?

I'd second the 10-22!

There's also the new very cheap 10-18mm. But i don't now if it's already available.

Azathoth wrote in post #16930649
There's also the new very cheap 10-18mm. But i don't now if it's already available.

Is this a Canon lens?

Thanks so much, everyone. I'm learning so much.

Please keep the comments coming - everyone adds grist to the mill as they say.

So we have the following votes,

6 x Canon 10-22
1 x Sigma 10-20 f3.5
Tokina 11-16 f2.8
Samyang 10 f2.8

Seems pretty conclusive albeit the comment of the Canon 10-22 have a great affinity for flair.

Any last comments before I make a purchase?