Which wide angle lens?

[RebelT2]

having just bought a Cannon eos 550d with twin lens kit i am looking to buy a wide angle lens, have been looking at a EF 24mm f2.8 is this any good or can anyone suggest one.

[Watchamacallit]

I guess I can kind of chirp in here since I did a bit of research before buying my UWA. A guess a few question people would immediately ask would be:


What's your budget?
Are you looking at a prime based UWA (from your post) or a zoom range?


Also as a note, the 24mm would be about 38mm on a crop sensor (Canon is 1.6x, correct me if I'm wrong). When I was looking at UWA, I had the following in mind (I put the Canon in as I've read a lot of people recommend it as a close comp to the Sigma 10-20)


Tokina 11-16mm AT-X Pro f/2.8 DX
Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC
Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM
Canon 10-22mm EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM


May not be a huge help, but hopefully it can point you in a few directions to read reviews/get an opinion. Can always take your body down to a shop to try out their stock (even if you think of importing).

[David]

Watchamacallit has posted good information there to consider, especially taking into account the 1.6 crop factor which would take you beyond what I would call genuine 'wide angle' range.

I use wide angle lenses for landscapes and began with the # Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM
mentioned below and later moved on to the # Canon 10-22mm EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, selling the Sigma 10-20mm on AP within a week of putting it up for sale.

Given the money spent on the original kit you might decide that the Canon is beyond your range either financially or in terms of justifying the investment at your current skill level if you are a 'newbie' relatively speaking to photography.

I know nothing about the # Tokina 11-16mm AT-X Pro f/2.8 DX or the # Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC but I can speak from experience in recommending either of the other 2 lenses mentioned as very good quality wide angle lenses for landscape photography which is my area of experience.

A Sigma 10-20mm went for an asking price of 500.00 recently here on AP; the 10-22mm Canon will cost 300 + more. You can go to shopbot.com.au to get an idea of the price range on the lenses in Australia keeping in mind the cheaper ones will be grey imports with overseas warranties you may not find attractive.

Good luck with your search.

[Watchamacallit]

With what David has highligheted is actually quite valid regarding financials and skill level, is an important factor (such as a reason some people select a Sigma over Canon).

I have the Tokina myself, admitedly I have not have enough chances to play with it to form an extremely strong opinion based upon experience. However, the times I have used it so far it does live upto what a lot of the reviews state about this lens (Not just Ken Rockwell :P), I've found it quite sharp, esp when stopped down a few.

Due to the areas I focus in (namely low-light to very low-light) the option of a f/2.8 was what attracted to me, coupled with the quality of the images and easier corrected distortion (well, compared to how I hear some of the Nikon UWAs are). So for me, the limited zoom capacity (a trade off for a constant f/2.8) wasn't a killer.

Regarding the Sigma 8-16mm, afaik it's only starting (or soon to be) supplied to Oz but is the widest UWA available on a DX format (equiv 13mm for 550D).

Also, I had a quick squiz for rules regarding suggest places, etc but couldn't find anything other than it being removed from other posts, and since we're sponsored by some lovely shops erred on the side of caution :)

[rwg717]

Not the right member to be posting (as I am predominantly a long telephoto user), I had no wide angle lens in my kit and settled for the Tokina 12-24, only an f.4 lens but must say I was very impressed with its performance and if low light is not a problem for you this one might be a good option.
I understand that both Sigma and Tamron make good equivalents too but I have never used them:D
Richard

[robgubiani]

I have the tokina 12-24 and i quite a lot of wide angle photos and i am very happy with its performance and its build quality. Real work horse. I havent tried the MKII version of this lens but i think it would be safe to say it should be top quality also

[Craggles]

This is something im currently considering also, I'm leaning towards either the Canon or the Sigma 8-16

[JorgD]

I have been using the Canon 10-22 for the past 2 years now and it gets used a lot. The 17-55 is a much nicer lens, but 17mm is just not wide enough in too many situations. Sometimes even 10mm does not feel wide enough, but generally it is good enough. The 24mm f2.8 would no doubt be a really nice lens but on a crop factor camera would not be considered wide.

[Darvidanoar]

I have the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 and have used the Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 and both these lenses perform very well and produce very sharp images.

The standout feature of the Canon is that it handles flaring very well, something the Tokina does suffer from. For me, the reasons for going for the Tokina were:

(a) it was slightly cheaper then the Canon; and
(b) the constant f/2.8 appealed to me for low-ish light situations (but you won't get much bokeh at 11-16 :)).

[OzzieTraveller]

G'day RebelT2

May I offer my 2-bob's worth & I suggest that you look at it (your project) very differently
You have correctly asked for opinions, and all of us will tell you "what suits me is okay for me & I enjoy it, therefore it'll suit you too".
However, may I suggest that it's like buying a new pair of shoes ... only you can determine what will fit your needs

1- you want a wide-angle lens ... well how wide??? 24mm or 18 or 16 or 14 or 12??
.... it's no good talking focal lengths unless you know how wide you want, and what you are going to use it for
2- take a piece of paper - ie: a 90 degrees angle, cut it to about 100mm square
3- place it under your eye and look around you - esp indoors where a w/a is of most use
.... do you need 90deg vision? - or more - or less

Look up the lens maker's specs for lenses to determine focal length vs angle of view & then you'll be able to ask Qs about specific lenses

Then, and only then can you start to examine your options

Regards, phil

[Automatnight]

I'm in a similar dilemma for a wide angle lens for my 450D. I shoot mostly street/documentary so I want a lens that will be the equivalent of roughly a 50mm on my crop sensor, preferably prime. Right now i'm torn between a Sigma 30mm 1.4 and a Canon 28mm 1.8

[Tannin]

Just to pick up on a detail - though an important one - 24mm isn't really a wide angle lens, not on a 550D. It's wide-normal, or perhaps borderline wide.

Similarly, on a 450D, 30mm is very clearly not wide-angle, it's normal. 28mm would usually be regarded as normal too.

On 1.6 crop bodies, you'd regard wide-angle as anything less than about 24mm. Anything less than about 16mm is ultra-wide.

Automatnight: I can't comment with any personal knowledge on your two lenses, except to say that Bryan at The Digital Picture is practically never wrong and should always be your first port of call.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx and http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-30mm-f-1.4-EX-DC-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

From that, it seems that the Sigma is likely to be the better choice, but that's my reading. You make up your own mind.

One thing I can add is that I have a Tokina 35mm f/2.8 macro lens. This probably wouldn't be ideal for you - largely because the focus motor is poor, though the glass itself is excellent - but it provides me with a fast prime that is the film camera equivalent of a 56mm lens on a 50D, or (even better, just a joy to use) equivalent to a film camera 45mm on my 1D III. What I'm saying here is that if my experience is anything to go by, a 30mmish prime on a 450D will be a delight. Do it! The 30mm 1.4 will be exactly the same effective length on your 450D as my 35mm macro - film equivalent 45mm. That's a very handy length.

[RaoulIsidro]

I use the Canon 10-22mm for architecture and interior design because of minimal barrel distortion. It renders straight lines, straight! It is slightly better than my old (very old but still very usefull) Canon 17-35mm f2.8L on full frame.
It would be a wise investment to own one!

[Automatnight]

I ended up going for the Canon 28mm 1.8 because it was lighter and the sigma felt too heavy on my 450D body- I got a bad copy of the Canon that would randomly over expose but the place I bought it from switched it out for another and its been great since!