forestgnome
New member
I need a small lens for my Canon 400D. Under $400.00 would be nice, and I don't like fixed length. It should be in the area of 12mm-24mm. I have 28mm and larger covered. Thanks!
happy trails
happy trails
wide angle lens recommendation, please
- Thread starter forestgnome
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
Tim Seaver
Well-known member
Canon makes the best ultra-wide on the market in this range, the 10-22mm.
It is my standard lens to carry for adventure photography, particularly in winter.
The bad part is that they are about $700.
Here's Ken Rockwell's review of the lens.
It is my standard lens to carry for adventure photography, particularly in winter.
The bad part is that they are about $700.
Here's Ken Rockwell's review of the lens.
DougPaul
Well-known member
I have one too. Awesome lens.Tim Seaver said:
eFL=16-35mm on the 400D (=XTi, crop factor 1.6)
Doug
w7xman
Active member
I'm in the same market, and running into the same problem. The canon 10-22 is clearly the best in the class...it is made with 'L' quality glass, but isn't an L due to build quality and crop factor. But it is above budget.
The other options are to look to the third party lenses...sigma, tamron and tokina all make ultra wides for crop bodies.
Reviews seem to put the Tokina as the sharpest lens with good build quality, and at almost half the price.
Here's the review at fredmiranda.com...my go to for lens info!
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=327&sort=7&cat=40&page=1
The other options are to look to the third party lenses...sigma, tamron and tokina all make ultra wides for crop bodies.
Reviews seem to put the Tokina as the sharpest lens with good build quality, and at almost half the price.
Here's the review at fredmiranda.com...my go to for lens info!
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=327&sort=7&cat=40&page=1
ROCKYSUMMIT
New member
I have the Tokina and love it. It's a bit heavy but hardly ever comes off my camera.
CrisisBill
Member
I have the Tamron 11mm-18mm Dll LD and love it, light, bright, clear and crisp, fast and tough.
forestgnome
New member
w7xman said:
Thanks to Tim and Jim for links and all responses. It's amazing to me that one person (in that review article at fredmiranda.com) can so passionately describe it as lacking sharpness, while so many others praise the sharpness and contrast.
Since $ is an issue, I'm leaning toward the Tokina. I'll also look at that Tamron. The Canon is obviously a high-quality lens that will not disappoint.
darren
Poobah Emeritus
Just wanted to chime in with Tim and give big props to the Canon 10-22mm. If you save up you wont be disappointed. You might want to look at trying to find a used one. Maybe someone upgraded to a 5D.
I waited a while to get mine and after I did I kicked myself for waiting so long and missing a lot of good shots.
Here is a sample:
It is very good even all the way at 10mm:
although at 10mm (16mm effective) you need to be a little careful about subject placement.
The good thing about shooting that wide is that you get a little more leeway with shutter speed. Those shots are hand held. (with my leg there is no way I was going to haul a tripod up there.)
Don't know much about the tokina or tamron, but I know some people with the Sigma and they seem to satisfied with it. I just like to put Canon glass on a Canon body.
- darren
I waited a while to get mine and after I did I kicked myself for waiting so long and missing a lot of good shots.
Here is a sample:
It is very good even all the way at 10mm:
although at 10mm (16mm effective) you need to be a little careful about subject placement.
The good thing about shooting that wide is that you get a little more leeway with shutter speed. Those shots are hand held. (with my leg there is no way I was going to haul a tripod up there.)
Don't know much about the tokina or tamron, but I know some people with the Sigma and they seem to satisfied with it. I just like to put Canon glass on a Canon body.
- darren
forestgnome
New member
Darren, very nice! Thanks for posting those. This is the way to learn about a piece of equipment: actual results from another shooter. The first shot is especially nice. The last one at 10mm is amazing. I see no warping at all.
Thanks. Hope you're healing well
Thanks. Hope you're healing well
Grandaddy
New member
Here's another review:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-10-22mm-test.shtml
One consideration with any of the EF-S lenses is that they are built for the smaller framed cameras and not (easily) with full-framed sensors, which likely will be the future.
Priced at $629 from Abes of Maine (I used them before and have been satisfied.)
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-10-22mm-test.shtml
One consideration with any of the EF-S lenses is that they are built for the smaller framed cameras and not (easily) with full-framed sensors, which likely will be the future.
Priced at $629 from Abes of Maine (I used them before and have been satisfied.)
DougPaul
Well-known member
Grumpy
New member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,503
- Reaction score
- 153
Grandaddy said:
Good point.
As a Nikon guy I am not familiar with the various Canon camera bodies and lenses.
However, with advent of the Nikon D3, which sports a "full frame" capability (image sensor roughly the same same size as a 35mm negative), a couple of people I know are having second thoughts about their purchases of Nikon DX series lenses. The DX series is designed with a circle of coverage suited for the smaller (than "full frame") sensors that were standard in Nikon DSLRs prior the D3 (and still are in most models). These lenses will produce a vignetted image on a "full frame" sensor or 35mm film.
G.
darren
Poobah Emeritus
True, EF-S lenses like the 10-22mm can not be used on the Canon full frame body like the 5D or it's follow ons (most likely). That is one reason that I hesitated in buying the 10-22mm (the other reason being cost). My thought being that I would eventually upgrade to a 5D or some full frame model and be stuck holding the EF-S lens. But I made the jump and I am very glad I did. I get to use my camera right now to take wide landscape shots instead of having to wait years until the price drops on the full frame bodies. When I eventually do get a full frame body I will probably sell the 10-22 and get a 17-40 L.
Did an incredible hike on Sunday and the 10-22 was the only lens I brought. I posted a gallery of shots from the hike so you can see some more examples from the 10-22. The summit shots are not thebest because it was so windy I thought I was going to get blown off the top. I couldn't use a GND filter or take the time to set up the camera right. No biggy, the best part of this hike for me was in the forest. The variety of tree as elevation changed was wild. All shots are handheld - including the ones in the woods. (Except the self-potrait, I put the camera on timer and put it on my camelbak on the ground.) The lens is super sharp and most of these shots had very limited post processing sharpness added (all shot in RAW).
Rest of shots:
http://www.vftt.org/HI/080127-Kuliouou/
Aloha
- darren
Did an incredible hike on Sunday and the 10-22 was the only lens I brought. I posted a gallery of shots from the hike so you can see some more examples from the 10-22. The summit shots are not thebest because it was so windy I thought I was going to get blown off the top. I couldn't use a GND filter or take the time to set up the camera right. No biggy, the best part of this hike for me was in the forest. The variety of tree as elevation changed was wild. All shots are handheld - including the ones in the woods. (Except the self-potrait, I put the camera on timer and put it on my camelbak on the ground.) The lens is super sharp and most of these shots had very limited post processing sharpness added (all shot in RAW).
Rest of shots:
http://www.vftt.org/HI/080127-Kuliouou/
Aloha
- darren
Grumpy
New member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,503
- Reaction score
- 153
darren said:
I agree that wide angle lenses introduce some "problems" when it comes to composition. We've discussed that here in other threads.
The "old" shutter speed rule for shooting in 35mm film format was that minimum shutter speed for hand-holding was about equal to the reciprocal of the focal length of the lens being used (1/FL). Thus, at 24 mm the minimum hand-holdable shutter speed would be 1/25 sec (or 1/30 sec, depending on the camera). I figure that is conservative, especially with the shorter focal lengths, but it does serve as a decent starting point to work out one's personal capabilities.
G.
darren
Poobah Emeritus
Canon has a $50 rebate on the 10-22mm right now so that drops the B&H price to $639. Yah, still way over $400. But I say go for it. (It is so easy to spend other people's money)
- darren
- darren
forestgnome
New member
Both good points by Grumpy and Darren, and both appreciated. I will be shooting the 400D for quite some time. In fact, I like to have a body for each lens. I already carry two. I won't be able to buy new bodies (full frame) anytime soon, and the images/files I now get serve their purpose.
happy trails
happy trails
DougPaul
Well-known member
Don't forget that the full frame bodies add a significant amount of weight--a 5D is 28oz (body only) vs 18oz (body only) for the 400D/XTi. The 5D battery is also heavier (3oz vs ~1 oz).forestgnome said:
One could also expect similar eFL lenses to usually be heavier for full frame too.
Perhaps not an issue near the car, but certainly an issue if you wander around in the woods with the toys...
Doug
darren
Poobah Emeritus
forestgnome said:
If you are resolved to that, then I would step up and get the Canon 10-22. The cheaper lenses might serve you as a stepping stone but if you are in it for the long haul then $200 more over years worth of photos is not much. (I am really good at spending other people's money)
- d
