Chasing UWA lens options

[pearson]

I have a 7D and I want an UWA lens for motocross to give a different perspective. I don't always plan on having a crop frame camera as my primary (will possibly buy a 6D in the future at least). I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM in dusty conditions? Will it stand up to that type of work or would I be better buying a 17-40mm f4 L instead and just put up with the fact I'll only get about 25mm at the widest on the 7D? Any advice on this would be much appreciated or if anyone has any pics taken with the 17-40 on a 7D that you could show as an example it would be great to see a couple at 17mm. Thanks in advance!

[ricktas]

I have a Sigma 12-24 (also a full frame lens) it has been used in dusty and wet environments and still works well. https://sigmaphoto.com.au/lenses/12-24mm-f45-56-dg-hsm-ii

[pearson]

Do you use it on a cropped frame camera at all Rick?

[ricktas]

Do you use it on a cropped frame camera at all Rick?

I haven't. But I could.. I tend to use the siggy 10-20 on crop camera.

Also note the 12-24 has a very bulbous front element, you cannot put filters onto it

[Tannin]

17-40 is a poor choice on a 7D. Out of the two you mention, the 10-22 is a far better idea. The 17-40, on crop, is neither fish nor fowl: it's not wide enough to be wide, it's not long enough to be general-purpose, and it's not fast enough to be a handy f/2.8 normal zoom.

(I'd rather like one for my 5D II, but that's an entirely different matter, and in any case, I'd certainly rather have the new and vastly improved 16-35/4.)

On crop, avoid the 17-40. It's pointless. You will find that the build quality and all-round excellence of the 10-22 wins your heart. Or, if you are thinking wider, the 15-85 is a little beauty, though a bit slow for sport/action. Or listen to Rick's good advice, subject only to 12mm being wide enough for you.

Finally, yes, I've used the 10-22 extensively in dust and salt spray and other harsh conditions. It just works. Wonderful lens in every way except one - it doesn't fit on my two best cameras!

[pearson]

Thanks Rick, I'm tossing up between the 10-22mm or 17-40mmL. I know the 10-22mm will give me UWA on the 7D but I'm just not too sure about it handling the dust. I'd be interested to see how wide a 17-40 (or similar) shot would look on a cropped frame. Would you have an example I could look at? Sorry to be a pain :)

[Sargimuss]

I tried the 17-40 in the store as we already had 1 10-22 and wanted a different lens. Initially, I figured it shouldn't be too bad, but the field of view at the wide end was essentially no different to the 18-55 kit lens at the wide end. I walked out with another 10-22mm. Though neither of us have full frame, we do like the width of the 10-22 for night landscaping.

The other options I've been looking at lately are the Samyang 14mm prime and I'm sure there was another uwa fixed prime that I'm looking into also, but can't quite remember which. The reason I'm looking into these is purely the extra speed as opposed to not being happy with the 10-22.

For night work, the 10-22 isn't quite fast enough to lower my iso to acceptable standards, yet in daytime, it's brilliant.

The other thing to consider is that I'm led to believe the 10-22 will only work at the narrow end on full frame, rendering it useless at the wide end.

[ameerat42]

:shh:(Actually, it's 10-20mm, not 22.)

[Sargimuss]

:shh:(Actually, it's 10-20mm, not 22.)
Sorry ameerat. It's 10-22mm 3.5-4.5. The Sigma may be 10-20, definitely not the Canon though.

[ameerat42]

Sorry ameerat. It's 10-22mm 3.5-4.5. The Sigma may be 10-20, definitely not the Canon though.

My ap:(logies too. (Let's blame Pearso for not specifying it:D)

[pearson]

Finally, yes, I've used the 10-22 extensively in dust and salt spray and other harsh conditions. It just works. Wonderful lens in every way except one - it doesn't fit on my two best cameras!

Thanks Tannin, this was my biggest concern. I know the USM will give me reasonably fast focussing as my last EF-S with USM works well. The dust was by far the biggest issue and if it was going to cause problems. I inevitably spend 8hrs a day in fine talcum powder dust when it's dry (which is all the time lately) and even though I try to remain upwind of the dust source it's not always possible to stay out of it. When I trade up to a full frame body I'll go with a 17-40mm then I guess.

Thanks so much for your advice! :)

- - - Updated - - -


My ap:(logies too. (Let's blame Pearso for not specifying it:D)

It's ok, I've got broad shoulders...;)

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks Sargimuss, all the advice I'm getting points to the 17-40 being a bad choice on a cropped frame body. By the sounds of it the 10-22mm will be the go and then when I purchase a full frame I'll look at a 17-40mm then. Thanks for your help! :)

[phild]

For your 7D you might also want to consider the Ef10-18 STM, although it's only for crop sensors, it reviews very well and is cheap. I wouldn't worry too much about future FF compatibility, lens resale value on eBay is usually fairly good, better to lose a few dollars (if and when you change) than compromise.

One other option you might want to try is a fisheye, you'd be damn close to the action and the perspective would be dramatic.

[geoffsta]

Also note the 12-24 has a very bulbous front element, you cannot put filters onto it

I also have the Sigma 12-24mm, but have also got the "Wonderpana" filter system for it.

Not sure about using it for motor X though... Could be far too wide.. Unless you want to experiment with distortion.

[arthurking83]

You can use filters on the Sigma 12=24 if you're using a crop sensor camera.
The Siggy has a two stage lens cap. One large metal cup like cover that slides on, but also a proper (82mm) centre pinch type lens cap too.
If you're shooting with an APS-C camera, you remove only the centre pinch cap and leave the metal cup[ like ring on the lens. If course 82mm filters are not cheap.
On a full frame camera you can only use the filter system at 24mm .. with very slight vignetting depending on how thick your filter is.

The Sigma is immensely sharp in the central part of the frame at just about any aperture value.
Only in the far corners on a full frame camera will it disappoint slightly for sharpness, where it needs to be stopped down a fair bit and still renders a little soft(but still acceptable).

If you have plans to go to a 6D at some point ... definitely go for a FF compatible lens.

[nisstrust]

I'm curious about the 16-35 is lens also may have to rent one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk