Ultra Wide Angle Lens for APS-C DSLR

[unistudent1962]

Hi all,

I am a relative newcomer to this forum (but not to photography) and would appreciate the advice and opinions of anyone who is willing to give it.

I am thinking about adding an Ultra Wide Angle lens to my kit and am considering the following options (not in any particular order).

Tokina 12 - 24 mm f/4
Sigma 10 - 20 mm f/4 - 5.6
Tamron 11 - 18 mm f/4.5 - 5.6.
Canon 10 - 22 mm f/3.5 - 4.5.

I am open to other suggestions if anyone has experience with alternatives to these lenses.

I am considering this lens to broaden my technique in landscape and architectural photography.

This question may have been answered elsewhere, if this is the case I'd appreciate it if someone could post the link for me.

[Wobbles]

Hi,
of the ones you've mentioned the Canon 10-22 is generally regarded as the 'best overall' and the Sigma 10-20 'best value for $'.

There are however a couple more I suggest you consider (sorry to complicate things) :rolleyes:

1. Tokina 11-16 f2.8 - Super sharp right out to edges & large constant aperture. What I was about to buy, till this came out...

2. Sigma 8-16 f4.5-5.6 - Widest APS-C lens available, apparently very sharp, yet to try one but looks amazing..

If you are serious about the architecture in particular (and have deep pockets) the Canon TS-E 17 f4L is an exceptional choice.

Cheers
John

[unistudent1962]

Thanks for making things easier for me John!!!

Unfortunately my pockets are nowhere near deep enough for the TS-E.

[Eberbachl]

The Tokina 12-24 f/4 is a lovely lens. I have owned two of them - the original and now the Version II with the focusing motor built in (for Nikon).

I can't comment on the others you've mentioned, ad I haven't used any of them, but I'm thrilled with my Tokina.

Also supposedly nice (as mentioned by Wobbles) is the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. I haven't used one but it reviews well.

Between the two Tokinas it's really a toss up if you think the extra focal range is beneficial or the extra stop of the f/2.8. I prefer the extra range, so use the 12-24. YMMV.

:)

[djvkool]

I had a chance to play around with Sigma 8-16mm, very nice indeed, and extremely sharp at 8mm, with just slight CA, but the downside is that at the moment this lens is quite expensive for a Sigma (about $900)

I would personally recommend Sigma 10-20mm, you could pick it up for about $400 used, which is excellent value

[etherial]

Yep, this comes up often...

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?p=682910
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=56904
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=58752
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=60277

and an older thread but still very relevant:
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=18315&highlight=wide+angle+canon+sigma+tamron

[RaoulIsidro]

The Canon 10-22mm has superb optics and renders straight lines, straight. Great for Architectural and Interior Design photography. The others may exhibit some form of barrel distortion on both ends of the focal range. Read the reviews about these lenses from reliable website forums.

[Entrapro]

I love my Canon 10-22 and it does give that extra bit of wide angle compared to my Tamron 18-270. Although the former has less distortion, the latter is fully correctable in DXO Optics Pro. Interestingly, though I am a wide-angle freak, when I took both to Europe recently I found myself using the Tamron 99% of the time because changing lenses was a nuisance.
Below is a photo taken in Zaragoza, Spain using the tammy at 18mm and the one below that is Avoca, taken with the 10-22 (plus CPL to cut through the reflections). I guess the bottom line is if you want a pure wide angle for a Canon then you can't go wrong with the Canon 10-22 but if you want a more versatile, all-in-one, then the Tamron is not bad. I am happy with both.

[unistudent1962]

Thanks for the input. I'm leaning towards the 10-22 Canon, just have to see what the Minister for Finance thinks. The 10-22 should fill the gap at the lower end to complement my 17-85 IS and 70-200 f4L IS. I love the pic of Avoca, the DOF is incredible, and great saturation.

[pmack]

Entrapro, i really like the first one, but the second one (avoca), looks blury.
you sure you don't have a dud CPL?
I had a bad hoya CPL that made my shots appear out of focus.

Here's a shot from my 10-22, almost rigth out of the camera, just did a quick auto levels and minor unsharp. love the lens.
i wonder how the 17-40L will compare when i go to full frame...

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y284/surfphotoac/IMG_5159.jpg

[Entrapro]

Thanks for pointing that out Pmack. Now that you come to mention it, it does look blurry. I'm not sure what is doing it but it's something I will look into.

[Entrapro]

Hi Pmack. I just did a test photographing a brick wall with and without the CPL on and you are absolutely correct! My HOYA CPL is making it blurry! Brilliant piece of detective work! Looks like the forum is doing what the creators hoped it would. Any ideas on contacting HOYA? Did you get a replacement?

[Entrapro]

Pmack. Here's my brick wall test. The second one is with the Hoya CPL filter on. I just cropped them down to about 1000 pixels along the long side.

[Entrapro]

Filter on

[in2fx]

I only have experience with the EF-S 10-22 and love it :)

[pmack]

Hi Pmack. I just did a test photographing a brick wall with and without the CPL on and you are absolutely correct! My HOYA CPL is making it blurry! Brilliant piece of detective work! Looks like the forum is doing what the creators hoped it would. Any ideas on contacting HOYA? Did you get a replacement?

damn... glad i could help! :) and yes that is the exact sort of effect it had on my shots.
not sure what the odds are of that, because i havn't read about this problem on the net, just experienced it myself. i purchased it off ebay (seller urgalaxy-au) a while back, so i didn't bother trying to do anything about it. i ended up upgrading to a PRO version instead as it's got the multi coating. i went the kenko one though, same manufacturer as hoya but was cheaper. this was a few years back

i wonder how common this problem is. and i wonder if perhaps we have dodgy fake copies. though it seems legit if not for the poor image quality...

hmmm :confused013

edit: maybe start a new thread and post up those images and see if others have this same problem? (to save hijacking this topic also ;) )

[Entrapro]

Good idea about the new thread because others should know about this too. And thanks again for your help. The only problem is that I can't look at my old photos the same way ever again; all I'm going to see now is the blur!

[pmack]

haha, yeah i know what you mean, at least you discovered in now rather than never!
i'm glad i noticed it the very first time i used it. i was actually using a new lens at the time (100-400L)
did some test shots simillar to yours and was pleased to find out that it wasn't my expensive lens that was blurry!

continuing my detective work, i think unistudent1962 needs glasses if he thinks there is "incredible depth of field" in your shot which is completely blurred :P

[unistudent1962]

You're right,

Now that I've got my glasses on I can see how bad it is.
That'll teach me not to wear them.
Entrapro should consider getting his checked too, considering he posted the image as an example of how good the Canon 10-22 is. I'm glad he's not part of my marketing team.

[pmack]

You're right,

Now that I've got my glasses on I can see how bad it is.
That'll teach me not to wear them.
Entrapro should consider getting his checked too, considering he posted the image as an example of how good the Canon 10-22 is. I'm glad he's not part of my marketing team.

haha, i know that's why i put up my own photo (without a bad CPL on it!)

in an attempt to get back on topic here's a 100% crop from my shot using the 10-22
no sharpening done. taken with a 40D

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y284/surfphotoac/IMG_5159cp.jpg

[Entrapro]

Darn it, you guys are turning me into a pixel peeper! But at least I'm even happier with my 10-22mm: I told you it was a great lens! :-)

[gje38752]

This is part of what this site is about, informal help. I'll be looking at things a little differently.

[parso]

I've got the Tokina 11-16 2.8 and love it. It reviews really well and the constant 2.8 is great. The lens is nice and sharp and I would recommend it.

[fabian628]

I had the 10-22, its a great lens. I have no experience with other third party lenses, but you pay extra for canon, and get a little better quality i think.

at 10mm its a fun lens, and gives you the perspective that 18mm will not! :)

some fun images

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af352/Natural_Defence_Plant2/10-22/IMG_4418.jpg

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af352/Natural_Defence_Plant2/10-22/IMG_3105-Copy2And2more_tonemapped-CopyAnd2more_tonemappedbw.jpg

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af352/Natural_Defence_Plant2/10-22/IMG_9857.jpg

8-10 images stiched, taken in portrait at 10mm!

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af352/Natural_Defence_Plant2/10-22/Panobeach.jpg

only reason i have sold it becuase i no longer have a crop camera. Alot of people restrict thier lens choice due to anticipating full frame upgrade in the future, these people are missing out on these great lenses :D

[unistudent1962]

Great pics fabian628, 10mm is a LOT wider than 18mm.
Thanks to all those who contributed to this discussion.
I've decided that once I've got enough money saved, I'll be going for the Canon 10-22.
The next question is New/Grey/Secondhand?

[fabian628]

it is quite expensive new. I think you can get a nice one of ebay for around $700 second hand. Not bad deal at all.

[etherial]

I picked mine up for $600 from eBay, managed to meet the seller and pay cash, went well!

[Bobby01]

Hey guys, I have the Canon and an seriously happy with it! Its an awesome lens and as long as you're not too worried about barrel distortion in the corners when photographing closer subjects its a great lens.
I bought mine brand new with my 550D from Citiwideonline.com
The lens comes with warranty for $770, plus around $50 postage (DHL couriers) so well priced for a new lens.

Hope that helps!

[greenc10]

Howdy,

new to DSLRs, but have just started using the Tokina 12-24 - so far so good!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/saintcraig/5082059661/


cheers,
Craig

[aslro]

Don't forget about the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
- Solid built comparing to Canon "Gold Ring"
- f/2.8 and sharp

[unistudent1962]

it is quite expensive new. I think you can get a nice one of ebay for around $700 second hand. Not bad deal at all.

I keep looking on eBay as well, most seem to be going for around the $700-$750 mark, so I'm thinking buying a new Grey one for about $800 including postage.

If I buy used I won't get any warranty, unless it's less than 12 months old (and most used ones seem to at least a couple of years old and are usually being sold by people upgrading to FF), and technically warranties can't be transferred anyway.

If I buy Grey I'm getting a NEW lens, even though it won't have an Australian warranty.

Can anyone see any flaws in my thinking?