I have bought a Canon 5D and want a wide-angle lens?

[shadowcatcher]

Dear All,

 

I have just bought a canon 5D and consequently sold my beloved 10-

22mm EF-s lens (which was great). I just loved the ultra wide-angle

shots I got at 10mm on my canon 20d. I now need to replace it and

have been told I should think about one of these three lenses. I am

not worried about size as all I am interested is the image

produced.

 

Canon EF 17-40mm F4 L LENS

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL

 

All are similar prices and so suggestions would be most appreciated.

 

With very best wishes,

 

Kev

[ken munn]

I have a SIgma 15-30 which I'm very pleased with, and so are others according to the Fred

Miranda site.

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/

[rainer_t]

Kevin,

 

the Sigma 10-20 is a DC lens ... its imagecircle is not big

enough for the 5D !

 

"DC" in Sigmaland means the same as "EF-S" in

Canonland and "Di II" in Tamronland ... these lenses are only

good for APS-C size film/sensor. (not for the full frame).

 

Within your selection I personally would take the Canon 17-40.

 

Rainer

[matt_miller8]

I too would recommend the 17-40L -- it is a fantastic lens. You won't be disappointed with it.

 

Good luck!

[mike_smith2]

matt

 

what body are you using?

[John Crowe]

If you liked the 10-22 then definitely the 17-40. If you would like something even wider but don't mind giving up the moderate wide angle end then the Sigma 12-24. If you go with Sigma you may have to buy a 50/1.8 for a normal lens unless you have one already. I have seen a link in photo.net to images comparing the Sigma to the Canon and Nikon 14mm lenses and it performed brilliantly. I don't generally recommend third party lenses but this one is worth a look.

 

 

Check the links in this forum posting:

 

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FYQH&tag=

[denisbergeron]

I got the 5d (with the 24-105) and even if I got a 8mm and 16mm lens I take the 12-24mm from sigma and love it ! See my portfolio for samples !

[ifeito]

Don't stick an off brand lens on your 5D!

 

Go for the 17-40 F4L or the 16-35 F2.8!

[pjmeade]

I have the 17-40, but on a 20D. I think it's an excellent lens, sharp and quick to focus and very good value for money. Another Canon lens to consider is the 16-35/f2.8, which is about double the price of the 17-40. There is a luminous landscape review and comparison of the two lenses. But the bottom line is the 17-40 is a grand lens.

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml

 

Hope this helps. P

[stacy_egan]

I have the 17-40 on a 20D as well, and am very happy with it.

 

Examples of the 5D + 17-40D are here:

 

http://www.pbase.com/sheila/canon_1740_f4l_with_5d

[bellavance]

Denis,

 

Where can I see the shots made with the Sigma 12-24 on the 5D?

 

Pierre

[digitmstr]

You spent the money on the body, get the best lens you can afford.

 

My suggestion: Canon EF 16-35 f/2.8L

[lovcom_photo]

Giampi is right....if you can swing it $ wise, better to get the Canon 16-35 F2.8L. You have such a great camera, why get the 2nd place lens? I think you'll find more use for F2.8 then you might realize.

[nasmformyzombie]

Zeiss Contax 21mm Distagon with C/Y-EOS adapter. Puts all of the Canon/Sigma/whatever wide angles to shame. Only available on the secondary market (out of production), will cost $$$$$, but you're a doctor, you should be able to afford it.

[shadowcatcher]

Bloomin 'ek I am now even more confused than before! Ok chaps what's the best prime I should go for if you can't agree what type of zoom is best?

 

Best wishes

 

Kev

 

PS I'm the cleverer but skint type of doctor (PhD) unfortunately. This is compounded by the fact of this www.researchphotography.org - yeah I know I'm a socialist fool!

[digitmstr]

If you get ANY manual focus lens you will have to give something up, in addition of AF. For example: The camera's meter will ONLY work in M and Av modes. Your EX flash will NOT work in any modes except Av. Any other mode will cause errouneous exposure. You will have to focus first and then, stop down to meter. If you can live with those "limitations" buy a manual focus lens.

 

On the other hand, if you want to shoot pictures instead on counting resolution lines, get GREAT images, have fun and NOT deal with ANY limitations (and have the benefit of a zoom) then, get the 16-35...like countless photographers who have their images published daily have already done.

[marknagel]

I posted this in your other post, but I agree with Giampi, 16-35/2.8 is a great lens.

 

I have the 16-35L and the 10-22EF-s. I am very pleased with my 16-35. Its the same Focal range as the 10-22 on a FF camera and its faster and sharper. Since you are a Doctor, I'll just assume its in your price range:) Here are comparisons between the 16-35L and 10-22EFs

 

http://www.nagelhome.com/10-22%20vs%2016-35%2022mm.jpg

 

http://www.nagelhome.com/10-22%20vs%2016-35%2016mm.jpg

 

Mark

[dogbert]

"I have seen a link in photo.net to images comparing the Sigma to the Canon and Nikon 14mm lenses and it performed brilliantly."

 

I have owned the Sigma 12-24. Its colour and contrast is good, but the sharpness is below the 10-20 EX DC, and 18-50 EX DC lenses (which won't work with the 5D). The sharpness is still ok up to about an 8x10 enlargment. While I never compared it to the Canon or Nikon 14 mm primes, my experience suggests to me that its sharpenss with be lower than than of the 16-35 and 17-40 Ls.

 

I found composing good photos wider than about 16 mm was very challenging.

[dogbert]

Taken with the sigma 12-24 EX on an EOS 300D.

[tommyinca]

One other ultra wide prime option is an used Olympus's 21mm f2. They run from $650 - $950. At f2.0, it match well with 5D's ISO 1600 indoor performance. Its size is close to the smallish EF35/f2 or it could leave room in the bag for the 35/1.4L :-)

[John Crowe]

None of us will agree on anything...except to disagree.

 

 

The widest prime that you would likely want to spend the money on is the Canon EF 20mm f2.8, which is said to be not as good as some of the zooms. The 28mm f2.8 should be quite good, and is very affordable. Which primes to get depends on what lenses you already have.

 

 

I love photography but I also love getting the best bang for the buck, so I have absolutely no problem using manual focus lenses, mostly Nikon, on my 10D. Landscape photography in particular is actually better done without autofocus. When I am doing serious landscape work I am not using the viewfinder for focus I am using the guides on the lens or the hyperfocal distance for focus. So, it does not matter that the lenses are in stopped down mode at f22 or f32, still bright enough to get composition right on a wideangle lens.

[bellavance]

Canon's 17-40/4L is a very nice lens and is also cheaper than the 16-35/2.8L if you don't need f/2.8 aperture.

 

Pierre

[shadowcatcher]

Okay Chaps, is it the Sigma 12-24mm or the canon 17-40mm F4 L lens?

 

Many thanks,

 

KM

[george_lupton]

go for the 17-40L. i had a 20d and the sigma 10-20 lens. i now have a 5d and the 17-40L

and the difference is like night and day. there is a huge difference in the quality of my shots,

significantly more than just the megapixel count. hope this helps.

[shadowcatcher]

Dear George,

 

I think you are right and I'm leaning towards the Canon EF 17-40mm. I have looked at various comparison pictures on the web and I must say they are all different. I think you can get good and bad versions of the same lenses.

 

All I need to do now is tell the wife so I can release the funds. Easier said than done considering how many pairs of shoes that'll buy.....................................

 

Best wishes

 

Kev