UWA crop lenses on FF cameras?

I've moved from APS-C to a 1D and 5D. My Tokina 11-16 works on the 1D from 12-16 and works on the 5D at 16mm.

I'm seriously considering getting the Tokina 12-24 f/4 and I wonder how it would work on the 1D or 5D.

Anyone try it?

Why not just get lenses meant for use on a 1D and 5D?

The 17-40/16-35 would be your ideal UWA lenses... Those other lenses are for crop cameras and really wouldn't be a good choice at all.

yeah, 17mm on a FF is much different than 17mm on a crop body.

I'm in a similar boat. I regularly shoot 1.6 1.3 and FF formats and don't want different lenses for each format. So I stuck with my 1.6 crop lenses (10-22 and 11-16). The Tokina 11-16 is amazing in that it works well on all three formats. That is what I use most of the time if I want ultimate flexibility.

This was my thought process for using 1.6 UWA lenses exclusively.

What I wanted was the 16-18mm equiv FOV. That's what I consider ultra-wide. It depends on your style and usage, but when I put on an UWA lens, I want W-I-D-E. For example, people generally don't slap on a 17-40 because they want to use the 25-40 range. They put it on because they want 17mm. I think this is the thought process Tokina was thinking when they designed the 11-16. And they were right, it's a huge seller.


Widest 35mm equiv FOV:

16-35
--------
1.6: 26mm
1.3: 21mm
1.0: 16mm

17-40
-------
1.6: 27mm
1.3: 22mm
1.0: 17mm

Sigma 12-24 DG
---------------
1.6: 19mm
1.3: 16mm
1.0: 12mm

14L
-------
1.6: 22mm
1.3: 18mm
1.0: 14mm


Widest usable focal length (35mm equiv FOV):

11-16
---------
1.6: 18mm
1.3: 16mm
1.0: 15mm

10-22
---------
1.6: 16mm
1.3: 16mm
1.0: 15mm

The biggest sore point I found was finding an UWA lens for 1.3 crop format. The only real choices were the Sigma 12-24 DG and the 14L.

14L is expensive

12-24 DG is slow and variable aperture at 4.5-5.6. It does not take regular filters either, and is bordering on being not so UWA on 1.6 crop.

16-35 and 17-40 are not UWA on 1.3 and 1.6 crop.

10-22 can get UWA shots on all three formats, but is variable aperture, requires mods and can damage 1.3 and FF cameras if you are not careful.

11-16 can get UWA on all three formats, has excellent optics, cannot damage larger format cameras, is fast at F/2.8, is small and light, takes regular filters, and gives you up to 14.5mm F/2.8 on full frame. It is also the cheapest lens in the list. But it is very limited on the long end.

So in evaluating all of these lenses, my decision came to the 11-16. I considered the 12-24 but then if I needed speed then I'd need to get a 16-35 or 14L too. Then I wouldn't have speed and UWA for 1.3 and 1.6 format. Since I have to carry all my gear when I'm working all day, I didn't want to get 2-3 more lenses. I got it all in the 11-16.

I have not tried the Tokina 12-24 F/4 you mentioned on a canon camera. But I have used the Nikon mount Tokina 12-24 on my D700. It works on the D700 from 18mm and up. The 11-16 gives a much wider FOV than it's 12-24 cousin.

So it all depends on what's important to you. Bag space and weight was a big consideration in my decision, but it might not be for you.

A friend of mine, a local professional, used that 12-24 on his 20d and now uses it on his 5d and he says he loves it. From what I understand you will get a shadow-ring around the edges at the wider FLs, but it should still work well.

That for me is a key. My 11-16 works from 12-16 on the 1D and only at 16 on the 5D. If the 12-24 would work from 14-24 on the 1D and from, say 16 or 17 - 24 then it would be a good match for my 24-105L, especially at today's $400 cost.

But if the Tokina 12-24 vignettes below 18 or 19 mm, then my 17-40L would be a better UWA.

I may have to buy the Tokina 12-24 to see how it does before I decide whether to sell my 17-40L, 11-16 or both.

gasrocks wrote in post #8003881
Why not just get lenses meant for use on a 1D and 5D?

Cost, I suppose. I can buy a Tokina 12-24 for $400. My current 17-40 and 11-16 are both worth $550 or so. That is $150 in my pocket to help pay for the 5D that arrived yesterday.

How about a Sigma 15-30?

That would be 19.5-39 on the 1.3x crop and of course, 15-30 on the FF.

The original 1D, or one of the others?

The nice thing about the 17-40 is the build, along with the IQ. The problem is that if you are looking for extreme UWA, you are probably willing to live with the heavy vignetting, which may mean you want something wider.

I know it wasn't what you asked, but the 17-40 is a fantastic L lens at a great price. Mine is wickedly sharp.

Are you selling the one lens, or just looking to pick up the 12-24 in addition to what you already have?

The Tamron 10-24 is originally an APS-C Lens but fills FF at 13mm.

Check out dpreview for the above info

SalamiBrot wrote in post #8005088
The Tamron 10-24 is originally an APS-C Lens but fills FF at 13mm.

Check out dpreview for the above info

Interesting:

http://www.dpreview.co​m …-24_3p5-5p6_n15/page3.asp

Although there does seem to be a bit of vignetting at 13mm, still. looks like it would be a good 15-24mm lens option, though, and maybe 12-13mm woudl be OK on 1.3.

The few shots I have tried with my 10-22 on my 5D (back dust cover needs to be popped off) shows promising results from 15-22. Some very slight vignetting at 14mm.

Of course, you don't want to try and take a shot at 10-11 since the rear lens will get whacked by the mirror. I don;t see that happening other than by accident since it vignettes heavily below 13.

I'll be doing some more "normal" shooting on the weekend to see if this will work for me or go and buy a 17-40.

I don;t use the UW very often but when I do I really want to have a working UW.

I too did some test shots using my 5D and my 2 UWAs; Tokina 11-16 and Canon 17-40L.

The Tokina worked at 16mm. It showed less vignetting and barrel distortion than the 17-40L, but it was also less sharp. The sharpness erosion was most easily seen as you progress toward the edges. The 11-16 just wasn't designed for FF so it's wonderful image circle just doesn't extend to the edges even if vignetting isn't a big issue.

So, I think I'll just stick with the 17-40L and 24-105L. I think it is a better overall solution for my 1D / 5D pair than the Tokina 12-24 and 24-105L would be.