Help...I need a wider angle lens!

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by skip hansen, Aug 13, 2005.

  1. I recently added a Canon EOS 20D to my bag. I'm extremely happy with
    the results so far (just did a wedding with it almost out of the box).
    I bought a 70-300mm and a 28-70mm lens to start. For now, the 300mm
    end is sufficient...the 28mm end is not wide enough for some of my
    projects, ie, landscapes. I need some advice regarding both "ends" of
    my lens dilemma. What is best choice to add behind the 70-300 to
    extend it, and...please recommend a good wide lens without having to
    second mortgage my house? Thanks, Skip
     
  2. I think a lot of people are in the same boat. I shoot with a sigma 24-70 2.8. And am
    considering the canon 17-40 or 17-85. But soon I will need wider. I found a pretty nice
    link about field of view. http://www.canon-20d.com/wide-angle-lens-compare.php The
    canon 10-22 seems a little soft for me but I think I might try the sigma 10-20. or canon.
    15mm fisheye. hope that helps good luck.
     
  3. How wide do you need to go? The 17-40/4L USM is a pretty common standard zoom for the 20D. I have one and it's a fine lens, definitely worthy of the red band and letter L. If you're accustomed to lenses on 35mm film bodies, you'll find it's equivalent to a 27-64. If you need more speed, there's always the 16-35/2.8L USM, but at about twice the price, and its long end goes even less into the short tele range than the 17-40 does. If you need more range and can give up a bit on the optics (better than the average consumer-grade lens, but not up to L standards), there's the 17-85 IS.
    On the long end, how much longer do you need, do you need a zoom or a prime, and how fast does it need to be? Oh, and how much can you afford without needing a second mortgage? If you want reasonable quality and/or speed, going beyond 300 gets pricey; heck, even reasonable quality as far as 300 isn't cheap, as most consumer-grade x-300 zooms are, um, not stellar at the long end.
     
  4. I would spend $100 on a 18-55mm EF-S lens until you decide just how wide you need or until you get a full frame DSLR. Good luck.
     
  5. jbq

    jbq

    The 17-40 is a very fine lens at its wide end, which is what you'll buy it for.
     
  6. How about the Tokina 12-24? Nice lens, goes fairly wide (12mm = 19mm on a Canon 20D), fixed F4 speed, really nice system to switch between auto and manual focus, and razor sharp. It would also extend the focal range nicely from the lenses you already own without overlap.
     
  7. have you given thought to the 20 2.8? nice piece of glass
     
  8. How much you spend will depend on how fast a lens you'll need. I use a 16-35 2.8, which is an expensive lens even when bought used.

    If you can get by with an f/4 aperture, you should consider the 17-40. It's about $680 new at BH Photo. I've not used one, but from what I've read it takes really nice pictures.

    If you want to go really wide, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 is getting some good reviews. I would like to pick up this lens myself, but it takes awhile to save up an extra $500.

    As for teleconverters most people say the Canon 1.4x gives a much sharper photo than the Canon 2x teleconverter. But I have a feeling that either one on the 70-300 would degrade the image.

    It seems that going wider than 28mm and longer than 200mm gives us very limited choices and can start getting very expensive.
     
  9. Hi,
    I've picked up a Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4. I took it on a recent trip and was happy with the overall results, esp for the price. Just to give you an idea, all the pictures here were taken with this lens except for the square ones.
     
  10. For wide angle work, I use the Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM. Remarkable lens and considerably less expensive than the alternatives. I've never been sorry I purchased this lens. I use the Sigma 24-70/2.8 Aspherical EX DG for midrange work. Both these lenses seem to work well with my 20D.

    Rich
     
  11. I too have had great results with the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4. Do a search here on Photo.net and I think you find many other have also.

    http://www.davenelson.com
     
  12. Thanks to all who contributed to this thread...just what I needed. Going to the Tamron 17-35 will take me where I need to go right now...I'm not looking for much more than that (fisheye-ish). Regarding the telephoto, I just need to save my pennies for a longer zoom eventually (500 or so).
    Skip
     

Share This Page

1111