Look for a wide angle lens for Canon

[Molnies]

I'm looking for a wide angle lens to be used on my 350D/Digital Rebel XT and (soon) 400D/DR XTi.

I don't have very much money at the moment since I just bought a 24" iMac and I'm going to buy the 400D soon as well, but somewhere around $600-900 maybe.

The lenses I'm currently looking at are:
(Prices are based on the Swedish market - converted to USD)

Canon EF 17-40/4L USM ($1070)
Canon EF 20/2,8 USM ($680)
Sigma EX 20-40/2,8 DG ($580)
Sigma EX 20/1,8 DG ($560)
Tokina AF 19-35/3,5-4,5 ($285)

Right now I would say that it's mostly between the 2 Sigma lenses, but then again I do not want to spend money on something that I feel isn't good enough in a year or so. These photos will be printed up to sizes of 30x40 inches.
Is the image quality better in the 17-40/4L or is the extra $500 just wasted? (I obviously understand that it's an L-series lens and that it's top quality, but would you honestly say it's worth the extra cash?)

As of right now the only wide angle lens I own is the 18-55mm kit lens, so anything will be an upgrade.

 

[Abstract]

Why not an 18-50 or 18-55 mm f/2.8 lens from one of the 3rd party companies like Sigma or Tamron? It's still cheap, and it's wider than the two Sigmas with their 20 mm wide end.

I took photos with my Tokina 12-24 mm last Friday that just aren't possible with most other "super wide angle" lenses.

 

[Molnies]

Thanks, I must have missed Tamron SP AF 17-50/2,8 XR Di-II LD - sounds like a great lens for the price $570. Looking at pictures of it makes me a bit unsure though, the focus ring seems to very short between infinity and close up which I hate since I always use manual focusing and the shorter focusing ring the more inaccurate it is.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

welcome to the Canon Lens Club.

I guess the real question is what do you like when you take a test drive on it?

These lenses all have specs that seem close to another, but vary some.

I recently bought a 5d and have a budding lens kit. I first tried the 17-40L canon lens. but i loved the 16-35 L f/4 quite a bit more. It was easier on my eyes. People differ on this issue.

It has a different perspective than another lense i have 24-105L f/4. which is excellent.

To be honest, this probably isnt the best forum to research the lens on. I would recommend http://www.dpreview.com search in the canon lens forums. post there. You will get more opinions than you really need to know, and even better.... you will get some test pics and such to look at. this is where talking won't cut it. Every budding photographer has a creative eye. different lenses have different draws for different photographers.

At the end of the day, i wanted the quality and security knowing that Canon Lenses would be the besti could use on it. But i have had Sigma before. It is all about f stop, get what you can. I just folllowed people's advice, the advice i got was stick to Canon. That said, you really ought to try out Sigma or Tamron. But who knows if you need a lens for low light situations or not. Best advice. go look at how the lenses look. that will help you decide, your going to be the one you need to make happy.

Good Luck from Los Angeles. Mitch

 

[andiwm2003]

why not the Sigma 10-20mm 1/4-5.6 EX DC?

i have it for the sony and i love it. if you want wide angle you should anyway get something less than 18mm.

 

[Abstract]

Ba dum ba dum...... http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28/index.htm

 

[iGary]

Sigma 12-24 - finest wide angle in my bag.

 

[nutmac]

Due to 1.6x crop factor on the Rebel series sensors, 20mm or 24mm lenses aren't really wide angle (translate to 32mm and 38mm, respectively).

I personally love Canon's EF 17-40mm f/4L USM lens, with its extraordinary resolution, although $1070 US is rather high (it costs about $700 US in the US). I am not sure Sweden gets the same treatment, but here in the US, Canon roll out mail-in-rebate promotion on the lens (and select camera bodies) once or twice a year. So you may wish to wait for that (if you are interested in Canon lens).

 

[Mike Teezie]

welcome to the Canon Lens Club.

snip...but i loved the 16-35 L f/4 quite a bit more......snip

Sorry to be nitpicky, but the 16-35 L is 2.8 glass.

Sigma 12-24 - finest wide angle in my bag.

Gary, did you ever try the Tokina 12-24?

 

[iGary]

Gary, did you ever try the Tokina 12-24?

I did, but it was soft - maybe I got a bad copy. It is actually the lens I tried first, didn't like it and got the Sigma. I have some absolutely beautiful images from the 12-24 the last time I was out in Big Sur.

I think it's an absolute must for a landscape photographer, personally, but people seem to get bad copies of the 12-24 Sigma, too.

It's a nice lens for shooting people up close, too, but the vignetting and CA is kinda severe for people shots.

More than you asked for.

 

[fotolilith]

I have REALLY enjoyed my Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens. In fact, I went to Italy recently, and I rarely took that lens of the body.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002Y5WXE/104-8667240-1467115?ie=UTF8

 

[Zeke]

For a cheap semi-wide I love my Tamron 19-35. Colors and sharpness are great. It has a touch of CA but for the price it's awesome.

 

[snap58]

I have REALLY enjoyed my Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens. In fact, I went to Italy recently, and I rarely took that lens of the body.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002Y5WXE/104-8667240-1467115?ie=UTF8

Agreed, great lens for the crop cameras, love mine.

20D
EF-S 10-22mm
1/200
F Number 7.1
Focal Length 10
iso 400

 

[cgratti]

Check out the Sigma 10-20mm. Its a sweet lens.... about $475 new.

 

[Abstract]

I did, but it was soft - maybe I got a bad copy. It is actually the lens I tried first, didn't like it and got the Sigma. I have some absolutely beautiful images from the 12-24 the last time I was out in Big Sur.

I think it's an absolute must for a landscape photographer, personally, but people seem to get bad copies of the 12-24 Sigma, too.

I don't think the Tokina is soft. In fact, the only reason to get the Sigma 12-24 mm over the Tokina 12-24 or Sigma 10-20 mm is because the Sigma 12-24 mm can be used on a full frame DSLR, while the other two cannot. It's just "planning for the future" as they say. I love constant aperture lenses though, which the Sigma 12-24 mm is not.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

Sorry to be nitpicky, but the 16-35 L is 2.8 glass.

Gary, did you ever try the Tokina 12-24?

your right, i was tired. was at the airport on my laptop before a morning flight back to LAX from JFK.

 

[seenew]

For the Rebel series, you can't get better than the EFS 10-22mm USM. I just got one, you can find them for $600-750 USD.

 

[sjl]

For the Rebel series, you can't get better than the EFS 10-22mm USM. I just got one, you can find them for $600-750 USD.

Ok, I think that settles it for me: next lens = EF-S 10-22mm, followed by the macro (and then the underwater housing). Let's see ... about $AU180 in the jar, I need about $AU1000 ... 18% of the way there. (if I can get away with minimal spending through to Thursday, that'll get me another $70 or so, to 25%. At this rate, I'll have it around Christmas.)

 

[Abstract]

Ok, I think that settles it for me: next lens = EF-S 10-22mm, followed by the macro (and then the underwater housing). Let's see ... about $AU180 in the jar, I need about $AU1000 ... 18% of the way there. (if I can get away with minimal spending through to Thursday, that'll get me another $70 or so, to 25%. At this rate, I'll have it around Christmas.)

AUD $1000? Where do you find your lenses for so cheap?

Found it for like $1200 at CCC Camera House, which usually has great prices.....better than other Camera House stores, and sometimes even the same price as dodgy eBay grey market types from HK.

 

[Mike Teezie]

your right, i was tired. was at the airport on my laptop before a morning flight back to LAX from JFK.

Quite alright, I felt like quite the jerk for even mentioning it.

 

[macdaddy121]

Sigma 10-20....you can not beat this lens for the money. $425 brand new.....and the range and build quality is amazing. The only problem with it is the lens cap. If my only problem is a lens cap then I have NO worries.

 

[bossass]

Another vote for the Tokina 12-24. I have one for my D70s and it is super well built and takes very nice pics.

 

[sjl]

AUD $1000? Where do you find your lenses for so cheap?

Found it for like $1200 at CCC Camera House, which usually has great prices.....better than other Camera House stores, and sometimes even the same price as dodgy eBay grey market types from HK.

Here. (Canon lenses and accessories at this page.)

They import all their stuff direct from Canon US, avoiding the markup that Canon Australia puts on gear. They're a Sydney retail operation. The only gripe I have is their communication; they shipped me a CF card instead of the 77mm UV filter I wanted, when I bought the 100-400mm, and while they fixed it up promptly when I told them what had happened, they didn't tell me what was happening until the day after they'd shipped me the filter. (Or maybe it was 11pm on the night of the day they'd shipped the filter; I can't remember.)

 

[Abstract]

Oh yeah, I know of them.

I've always been afraid to buy from them because of warranty issues. But I think with Canon lenses, they have a worldwide warranty. I was never sure about Nikon lenses though. If I bought a........oh........a Nikon 105 mm VR macro from them, I don't know how they'd handle the warranty. It's not with Mack Warranty or whatever, and so if it doesn't come with a Nikon warranty, I don't know how he'd fix it.