I hope this isn't a dumb question but whats the different between wide angle and ultra wide angle?
Csst Member 66 posts Joined Mar 2004 More info | Jun 02, 2004 12:38 | #1 I hope this isn't a dumb question but whats the different between wide angle and ultra wide angle?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000) More info | Jun 02, 2004 12:51 | #2 In 35mm parlance.. wide angle means anything wider than a 50mm lens... GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
GuillermoFreige Senior Member 704 posts Joined Jun 2003 Location: La Plata, Argentina More info | Jun 02, 2004 17:47 | #3 Probably the only "ultrawide" lenses for the DRebel/10D (if you discard fisheye lenses) are the Canon 14mm prime and the Sigma 12-24 zoom. I've never used the Canon 14, and probably will never use one because the cost, but the true ultrawideangle shots provided by my 12-24 are very welcomed in this 1.6x crop world Guillermo
LOG IN TO REPLY |
spaceman Member 177 posts Joined Oct 2003 Location: Maine "Taxationland" USA More info | Jun 08, 2004 00:16 | #4 Guillermo Freige wrote: Probably the only "ultrawide" lenses for the DRebel/10D (if you discard fisheye lenses) are the Canon 14mm prime and the Sigma 12-24 zoom. I've never used the Canon 14, and probably will never use one because the cost, but the true ultrawideangle shots provided by my 12-24 are very welcomed in this 1.6x crop world .Hi Guillermo,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
iwatkins Goldmember 1,510 posts Likes: 1 Joined Sep 2003 Location: Gloucestershire, UK More info | Jun 08, 2004 02:30 | #5 Alan,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CoolToolGuy Boosting Ruler Sales 4,175 posts Joined Aug 2003 Location: Maryland, USA More info | Jun 08, 2004 05:57 | #6 Guillermo Freige wrote: Probably the only "ultrawide" lenses for the DRebel/10D (if you discard fisheye lenses) are the Canon 14mm prime and the Sigma 12-24 zoom. I've never used the Canon 14, and probably will never use one because the cost, but the true ultrawideangle shots provided by my 12-24 are very welcomed in this 1.6x crop world .Don't forget the Tamron 14mm f2.8. It caught my eye when I tried one out, and for the difference in price between it and the Canon ($1000 vs. $1800) it is worth a look. Used (KEH.com had one as recently as yesterday for $725), it can be quite a find. Rick
LOG IN TO REPLY |
spaceman Member 177 posts Joined Oct 2003 Location: Maine "Taxationland" USA More info | Jun 08, 2004 11:28 | #7 CoolToolGuy wrote: I was warned away from the Sigma 12-24, and I am really more pleased with a prime lens at this focal length anyhow. 8) Have Fun, I have read a number of reviews, some very good and others not so good. However, I have looked at Ian's and Guillermo's photos with the Sigma 12-24, and am quite impressed with the picture quality, so that is why I have been asking about problems because I don't really see any in the photos (?). Also, the lower end of the 12-24 looks real temting to me right now, as I want to go as wide as I can get, not just for landscapes, but for special effects as well.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CoolToolGuy Boosting Ruler Sales 4,175 posts Joined Aug 2003 Location: Maryland, USA More info | Jun 08, 2004 11:46 | #8 spaceman wrote: CoolToolGuy wrote: I was warned away from the Sigma 12-24, and I am really more pleased with a prime lens at this focal length anyhow. 8) Have Fun, I have read a number of reviews, some very good and others not so good. However, I have looked at Ian's and Guillermo's photos with the Sigma 12-24, and am quite impressed with the picture quality, so that is why I have been asking about problems because I don't really see any in the photos (?). Also, the lower end of the 12-24 looks real temting to me right now, as I want to go as wide as I can get, not just for landscapes, but for special effects as well. As a known Canon bigot and someone who wants to use his equipment for years to come [Shields up], it wouldn't take much to keep me away from a Sigma lens. Their well-known issues with the EOS lens mount are enough, but the $1800 price tag for the Canon 14mm got me to thinking I may have to give in. However, the 12-24 is a maximum f4.5-5.6 lens, and I absolutely want something faster than that. Rick
LOG IN TO REPLY |
GuillermoFreige Senior Member 704 posts Joined Jun 2003 Location: La Plata, Argentina More info | Jun 08, 2004 15:16 | #9 I definitely like the 12-24, it`s one of my favorite lenses and the main one for landscapes. Low CA and consistent sharpness at all apertures and focal lenghts. Build quality is very good, and it has a good feeling too. My only complaint is about some flare issues at 12mm, but it isn`t a surprise in such a wideangle zoom. Guillermo
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 1697 guests, 103 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||