landscape lens for 1.6 crop body?

I've done exhaustive research but still can't decide which way to go for my first lens to use on a 450D. (I have reasons for wanting this body over a used 5D, etc,.) I shoot landscapes, and will eventually go full-frame. I need the IQ and can spring for L glass, but only one lens for now.

I'm not sure the 24-105 f/4 will be wide enough on a crop body--not all my shots are wide, of course, but 38mm is even less than I was getting on my RAW p+s cameras. No question it'd be great on a 5D, and I'd love IS.

Considering the 17-40 f/4L--the price is definitely right, as is the coverage, if too short. Light weight is a definite plus.

I understand the 16-35 II is better glass, but even less range, and twice the price.

Thought about the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, I think it'd be a great all-purpose, but lack of sealing concerns me, as I wade in creeks and rivers. Can't use it on my (future) full-frame, either.

Your shared experience would be greatly appreciated...

Personally none of those are wide enough for me on a crop body.
Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 12-24. At least the Sigma 12-24 will go with you to the next body for sure!

You can sell your glass if you go full frame in the future, buy for the present.

The Sigma 10-20 was my go-to landscape lens on my old 400D, and I do a LOT of landscapes. Shot with that combo in the rain, at the beach, by the lakes, in all kinds of conditions and they produced the goods.

It was my favourite lens.

Thanks, Mike and Perry. Are any of those fixed aperture lenses? I forgot to mention that as a necessity...

thanks my goal, is to find a canadian selling anyone one of the three mentioned lenses for my landscape shots (Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24)

Oh, fixed aperture is a necessity?

Then it's the Tokina 12-24 or the 17-40L really.

I've been fine using a 17-40L... although I'm not a fan of the UWAs so my opinion may be a bit biased.

I have a Tamron SP AF 11-18 f/4.5-5.6 that I'd like to sell or trade... I dont do enough landscape to keep it.

Let me know if you looking for a good deal.

Robert~

If I were you I'd consider a combination of one of the ultrawides and the ridiculously good value Sigma 24-60 2.8. I don't think fixed aperture really matters on the ultrawides, DOF is huge on all apertures and usually used on tripods for landscapes so speed irrelevant (plus you can handhold a 10mm lens at a fairly slow speed anyway).

perryge wrote in post #4945438
You can sell your glass if you go full frame in the future, buy for the present.

The Sigma 10-20 was my go-to landscape lens on my old 400D, and I do a LOT of landscapes. Shot with that combo in the rain, at the beach, by the lakes, in all kinds of conditions and they produced the goods.

It was my favourite lens.

I would vote for that one also. It's not so expensive either. I use it almost all the time and since it's in repair now I miss it.

perryge wrote in post #4945438
You can sell your glass if you go full frame in the future, buy for the present.

Thanks to all for your help. OK, If I'm not concerned about an upgrade path, the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS is of great interest. Though maybe not the greatest landscape lens, I think it could be quite versatile for other subjects as well (e.g.,florals with good bokeh), and would make a nice walk-around.

Any opinions on that glass?

Trout Bum wrote in post #4945860
Thanks to all for your help. OK, If I'm not concerned about an upgrade path, the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS is of great interest. Though maybe not the greatest landscape lens, I think it could be quite versatile for other subjects as well (e.g.,florals with good bokeh), and would make a nice walk-around.

Any opinions on that glass?

The best general purpose lens you can get for a cropped camera. Period.

I used the sigma 10-20 and canon 17-55 on my xti. Loved both. sold both when I bought the 5d, and now use the 16-35 and 24-105.
It really depends on your style of shooting. If your upgrade is imminent, then buy the 17-40. another good option would be sigma 12-24. wide and ff compatible. However, if you are going to keep 450 for at least a year, I would buy 17-55 first.

I have Sigma 10-20 and feel that it does the job. I love using it on my 40D.

Good price as well and come swith hood and case lol.

Ian

In all honesty don't buy now thinking about the 5D. Buy for NOW. If you buy something like the 17-40 and it's plenty wide on the crop it'll be too wide on the 5D (like the 10-22 on the crop)

My suggestion is to try both focal lengths, try the 17-40 and the 10-20/22 and see which you prefer. With the UWA you'll get more distortion and need to be "in" your scene. With the 17-40 you won't need to be in it as much.

Unless you're planning on shooting inside you really don't need the 17-55. When doing landscapes you stop the lens down to get more in focus, so the cheaper 17-40 will be a good choice. But that's just my opinion.