10-22 or 14mm 2.8, 15mm2.8

[charles_chesna]

I am looking for a lens to work well with my Canon 10D to take mostly indoor

shots of remodel work such as bathrooms or kitchens. It is important that I

get at least a 90 degree angle and a nice clear shot. I was originally

looking at the Sigma 10-22mm lens, but I am now wondering if I wouldn't be

better off with a staight say 14mm or 15mm lens with the 1.8 or 2.8 apeture.

All I would need to do is just back myself up to get a wider view in a tight

space. Is that correct? The lens I want will also take pictures of furniture

projects we build. Can I get some advise regarding the pros and cons here.

[doug_smith14]

The 10-22 is EF-S and won't mount on the 10D. The 14 is a lot of money as needed to be that wide on full frame so cutting off the expensive part of the frame makes less sense unless you are just too rich to still be using a 10D. The 15 is a fine lens if you like the fisheye perspective. I do; most don't. You? From what you write, I might go back to the Sigma or one of the other third party wide zooms for crop cameras. They won't cover full frame but their manufacturers did not bu a rubber bumper on the back that prevents mounting on full frame and pre-300D digitals.

 

In bathrooms, how are you going to back up to get a wider view? If the furniture will be shot out in the open where you do not have to be close (as in a bath), you might be happier with the results from a perspective sense shooting it with a longer focal length. Wide distortion (rectilinear or fisheye) is not going to record your product the way you might want it to. When you are in cramped space, you have to accept the perspective issues but I'd buy a 50mm f/1.8 or something else cheap (kit lens) for shots where you prefer a more normal perspective.

[jimstrutz]

Canon's 14mm and 15mm lenses are both f/2.8. There are no really wide, and still really fast lenses are made for Canon. The Canon 15mm is a fisheye lens, and the distortion is great fun but would look really odd for architectural photography. The 14mm f/2.8 is expensive, and would not gain you much over the Sigma lens for what you are doing. For this kind of shooting you will almost always want to mount the camera on a tripod, so a fast aperture is not so important. In fact, you would most likely stop the lens down to f/11-16 anyway. Distortion will be more of an issue for you. The Sigma is pretty good in this department, and it's easily correctable in post processing anyway.

 

The extra 4mm of wider coverage with the Sigma would certainly make it more usable in confined and semi-confined quarters. I believe the Sigma is 10-20mm, and Canon's superwide is 10-22, but alas, it won't fit on a 10D.

 

Tokina's 12-24mm, and Tamron's 11-18mm lenses are also quite good, but are not as wide as the Sigma, and for bathrooms & kitchens the wider the better.

 

The other way to do this is taking multiple overlapping images of the room and stitching them together to fake the coverage of a wide lens. Actually, you might want to do this with some places anyway, as no lens is wide enough sometimes.

[mark u]

You can't back up through solid walls. Go for the Sigma. If you are thinking of stitching shots with it or any other lens, be aware that for interiors you will need some high precision adjustment on a proper panoramic tripod head and some higher end stitching software - interiors are much more demanding than landscapes for stitching.

[ronald_moravec1]

Fish eye shots can be straightened with PTLens program. Other programs will correct some linear distortion such at Photoshop CS2 or PTLens. They also correct perspective distortion.

 

With less than full frame sensors, 15mm will not be 90 deg.

 

Get a standard lens for furniture, usually a 18/50mm zoom for less than full size sensors like yur 10D.

[joseph_wisniewski]

If you can't try them all, I'd start by going for the Sigma 10-20mm or the Tokina 12-24mm.

 

I have the Sigma 14mm and a Nikon 12-24mm (very similar to the Tokina 12-24mm). The 14mm f2.8 is a ultra wide angle lens built for full frame film. Its front is a budging, highly curved piece of glass, you cannot protect that large, vulnerable front with a filter. This may be of concern if you are photographing on construction sites. The 14mm design is very prone to lens flare. And you'll be shooting with some weird light sources in the room, so flare will be a problem. Despite being zooms, the 12-24mm lenses are much better in this respect.

 

Jim nailed one issue, you should be using a tripod for this stuff, and f8 is much sharper than trying to shoot any of these lenses wide open.

 

I'd skip the fisheye. Although if you use the right software it's extremely wide, much wider than the 14mm, and close to the 10mm, you have to do that software conversion for every single picture. It's not easy to compose your pictures through the viewfinder and guess at how they will look after conversion.

[charles_chesna]

Thanks for all the advise folks. I did visit my photo store today and chose the Sigma. The salesperson was very knowledgeable also, and he also suggested I go with the Sigma. I took a few shots today and the width spectum was awesome compared to the 28-105 canon lens I usually work with. What a difference. I think I should be able to accomplish what I need. The only thing I didn't like was the filter he sold me to protect the lens. He sold me a ProMaster Digital UV Precision Optical Filter 77mm. Wow $105.00? I thought a filter was 20 bucks. He said I really needed this type filter for this lens and the Digital. I trusted him and hope he did me well.

[yves_labbe]

Not that it matters now, but as a fellow cabinet maker who experiences the same predicament you are sometimes in, I always reach for my trusted and beautiful canon "FD" (yeah, don't laugh) 17 mm on my dear 20 some year old F1-N. This lens corrects fish eye curvatures so that even tall cabinets photograph with straight lines. Of course a tripod and level is recommended to keep the camera in perfect vertical-horizontal plane (well, if your cabinetry is in same perfect plane anyway). I am preparing to commit adultery with a Pentax K100D (although I will stay married to my F1-N) for ease of instant results. Anybody here knows of a similar very wide angle lens that does not have fish eye distortion and that I could use on my new digital?

Thanks!

[jimstrutz]

Charles, that sounds like a lot of money for a 77mm ProMaster filter. But that's what salesmen do, and that's why I never trust them. They are certainly not all dishonest, but they often have too much incentive to increase sales to take their word for anything.

 

Yves, the Sigma 10-20mm zoom that we have been discussing, when mounted on the K100D, will have the equivalent field of view of a 15-30mm lens on your F1. It will also render straight lines straight, just like your 17mm does now. Your 17mm might be a little faster optically, and possibly a bit sharper, but not by much - if any. And depending on the specific 17mm lens you have, it might exhibit less flare than this zoom, but then again, it might not.

[yves_labbe]

Jim, thank you. It does seem like a very good choice. I haven't looked at Sigma lenses since the 70s' because I (wrongly) thought that they were inferior. I can see that price wise they are at least in the range of Pentax. I do not mind that too much as long I get what I pay for. How is the resale value on these better lenses? (In the early 80's when I unloaded some Sigma lenses I hardly got anything for them except a look of disdain from the camera shop employee. :-)

[jimstrutz]

Yves, I don't think you were wrong at all. Sigma made some real junk. There are lots of stories of their 70-300 literally falling apart in an owner's hands. Truth is, they still make some poor lenses. Not as poor as before, and not as many of them, but there are still a few. But they also make some good lenses. Some are actually quite remarkable, and their prices are pretty decent most of the time.

 

There are two primary issues with Sigma lenses for EOS cameras. Historically, there has been an issue of incompatibility with newer Canon cameras. For years it seemed like every time Canon would upgrade their cameras, there would be a whole slew of Sigma lenses that needed to be "re-chipped." Sigma would do this for free as long as it was still a current lens model, but they switch models quite often, resulting in a lot of frustrated Sigma owners. There are claims that this future incompatibility issue has been solved, and will never reoccur. Perhaps it's true - the reasons seem logical. I can only hope so, because I have a couple of them.

 

The other issue is that many third party lenses (not just Sigmas) don't focus well on Canon cameras - either focusing too far or too short. To some degree Sigma can recalibrate to work better with your camera, but not all have been pleased with the results. To be fair, Canon has had their own issues with this as well.

 

As far as resale value, better lenses will always command a higher price and retain a higher percentage of their original value. But they do not hold their resale value nearly as well as a real Canon made lens. If you buy and never sell, this is not an issue. But if you're like me, never seeming to be satisfied with what you have, you may be better off sticking with Canon lenses if possible. But if you want a wide zoom for a 10D, you have no Canon lens choices, as their 10-22 will not fit it.

[james_parsons]

I have a fixed Sigma 14mm lens in Canon mount for my 10D. Actually was quite happy with it until it suffered a bad drop and then it would no longer focus. I sent the lens too Sigma and they made it like new again and had it back too me pronto and at a low cost. I have not been really critial as some of these folks might be in evaluating the lens, but I found when I broke mine that there were none in stock in the country in Canon mount, telling me this was selling well and the other owners must be as happy with their 14mm as I am. Now if you plan to upgrade too a Canon5D in the future this is not the lens for you, the 5D is a full frame sensor camera and this 14mm lens is pushing it's limits with the small sensor in the 10D. Some times you will see dark areas or color distortion in the corners, this surely would be more of a problem with the full frame cameras... Jim