Wide Angle Lens thoughts?
Folks, I'd really like to pick up a wide angle lens. Something in the 10mm to 17mm, 11mm to 14mm, range, but I don't want to break the bank either. I don't want to spend more than $300. I know that probably makes it impossible. A prime lens would work as well.
Any ideas.
I shoot with a Canon 40D.
Any ideas.
I shoot with a Canon 40D.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jonas Wilson on -
$300 is not going to get you a very good ultra wide. That's what the crappy 18-55 kit lens goes for....
Canon 10-22 is your best bet. B&H lists it at $770. It is a nice lens.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351542-USA/Canon_9518A002_EF_...
Tokina is cheaper ($600.00) and I've heard nice things about this lens- mostly about the extra speed (f2.8). B&H reviews are overwhelmingly good.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/554035-REG/Tokina_ATX116PRODX...
-
Permalink Reply by Erin on -
I had the 10-22 which I just sold because I no longer have a crop sensor, but I loved that lens.
-
Permalink Reply by Jason Holzworth on -
so you would take a 17mm lens? chuck rubin has a sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 for $250. i just saw it.
you aren't going to find much in your price range.
the new tokina 11-16mm 2.8 is $600 and doesn't stay in stock long.
-
Permalink Reply by Charles on -
Jason Holzworth said:....... the new tokina 11-16mm 2.8 is $600 and doesn't stay in stock long.
Trust me Michael.....this is the lens you want. Watch the sale forum on photography-on-the.net for it. I sold mine there when I went full-frame. I have a samples gallery shot with the lens. A variety of shots. IMHO it's the best lens for a crop body. You'll be much happier if you take your time, save up the money and get a Toky 11-16mm.
http://all-event-photos.com/Other/Toky11-16f-28Samples/7389256_xZvJc
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on -
I've read good things about that lens. but I'm just not going to shell out $600. It's just more than I can justify.
I may just stick to something like the Sigma Jason mentioned, but . . . I've never bought a good sigma lens. FYI. Jason, I picked up that Sigma today to try it and wouldn't you know it the auto focus doesn't work.
Classic.
Charles said:Those pics were shot with a 30D by the way.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on
-
I'd love to know what you think of it. Particularly if you think its soft. I have yet to buy a Sigma that's tack sharp.
Erica said:there's a sigma ultra wide 10-20 mm on Amazon for 479.00. More than you want to spend but not 600.00. I just ordered this lens and should have it in my clutches tomorrow. I guess I'll have more to report when I test it.
-
Permalink Reply by Charles on
-
The problem with the Canon, Sigma and Tamron lenses is that they're always 'in stock'. The Tokina 11-16mm has been out for close to a couple years now if not more and to this day they still sell out of stock as quick as they make it into the stores.
As far as cost justification, I just don't see in any value in saving a few dollars now and getting mediocre pics forever. Or in using a lens for two months and a switch or ring falls off of it. You get what you pay for and if you want quality and durability then you have to pay for it. The plus side to buying lenses that are always wanted is that you have no problem moving it when you decide to sell it.....without getting raped. I used my Tokina for 6 or 8 months I guess and sold it for $50 less than what I gave for it. Good luck trying that with one of the other brands.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on
-
What about an older Tokina?
Tokina AT-X Pro DX 12~24mm F4. It's not the DXII. I've seen it between $300 - $400.
I can't knock Tamron. My mid range f/2.8 is a great lens.
And there's one variable here that everything else revolves around . . . my wife.
I haven't seen one of my checks in 11 years.
If I had a paying gig, she wouldn't care. (So, you know I'm not totally spineless, I'm threatening to start charging her friends).
Charles said:The problem with the Canon, Sigma and Tamron lenses is that they're always 'in stock'. The Tokina 11-16mm has been out for close to a couple years now if not more and to this day they still sell out of stock as quick as they make it into the stores.
As far as cost justification, I just don't see in any value in saving a few dollars now and getting mediocre pics forever. Or in using a lens for two months and a switch or ring falls off of it. You get what you pay for and if you want quality and durability then you have to pay for it. The plus side to buying lenses that are always wanted is that you have no problem moving it when you decide to sell it.....without getting raped. I used my Tokina for 6 or 8 months I guess and sold it for $50 less than what I gave for it. Good luck trying that with one of the other brands.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on
-
How's this different than the Tokina you are referring to?
Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX. Isn't it the same lens? Someone is selling it at a starting bid price of $300. I imagine that will go up a bit, but I doubt it get's close to $600.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on
-
And one more question.
If F/2.8 at 11mm at 5 feet from the subject gives you a DOF of 10 feet (even at 16mm, it's something like 4 feet), then what do you need f/2.8 for? Presumably if its a portrait then 10 ft (and 4feet for me) is really too much DOF anyway and if its landscape, you're on a tripod at f/8 or higher anyway.
In short, f/2.8 at 11mm doesn't seem very useful to me.
I'm just trying to determine if I really need 11-16mm at f/2.8, or if Sigma's 10-20mm at f/4 to 5.6 or Tokina's 12-24 at f/4 would do. Both are cheaper and both very have solid reviews on optical quality.
Michael Tigue said:How's this different than the Tokina you are referring to?
Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX. Isn't it the same lens? Someone is selling it at a starting bid price of $300. I imagine that will go up a bit, but I doubt it get's close to $600.
-
Permalink Reply by Jonas Wilson on
-
From some website: "a fast lens, meaning that its maximum aperture is very wide, ... permit[s] you to take pictures in low light with faster shutter speeds. It is also typically a sharp[er] lens that is bright and easily-focused, with distortion-free images that have excellent resolution and color rendition."
Michael Tigue said:And one more question.
If F/2.8 at 11mm at 5 feet from the subject gives you a DOF of 10 feet (even at 16mm, it's something like 4 feet), then what do you need f/2.8 for? Presumably if its a portrait then 10 ft (and 4feet for me) is really too much DOF anyway and if its landscape, you're on a tripod at f/8 or higher anyway.
In short, f/2.8 at 11mm doesn't seem very useful to me.
I'm just trying to determine if I really need 11-16mm at f/2.8, or if Sigma's 10-20mm at f/4 to 5.6 or Tokina's 12-24 at f/4 would do. Both are cheaper and both very have solid reviews on optical quality.
Michael Tigue said:How's this different than the Tokina you are referring to?
Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX. Isn't it the same lens? Someone is selling it at a starting bid price of $300. I imagine that will go up a bit, but I doubt it get's close to $600.
© 2012 Created by Ryan Armbrust.
