my next lens

[jonathan_higa]

Hello,

I have a 400D with Canon 50mm f/1.4 and Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5. I would like

my next lens to be a wide angle. I'm looking at a Sigma 10-20mm, Sigma 17-70mm

or Sigma 18-200mm. Any suggestions on what lens I would most benefit from? I am

an amateur hobbyist and mainly shoot landscapes and portraits.

 

Thanks

J

[saskphotog]

Your choices seem odd to me. There is a vast difference between the 10-20mm view of the world and one that starts at 17 or 18mm.

 

My suggestion would be to find out which you want. If 17mm is wide enough, there are lots of good choices. If you need 10mm for a wide start, you have very few.

[mrossi]

I'd also look at the Sigma 18-50 2.8, it's quite a nice lens.

[graybrick]

Only you can answer this question. Look at sample photos and read reviews. This is your homework. I want the Canon 15mm, 14mm, 16-35 2.8, and I'd take the 10-22 on top of that for my wide stuff. Problem is, they're all expensive and they do slightly different things. When I decide to buy one I'll look at sample photos from each, read reviews on each, and do a down and dirty cost:benefit to make my choice.

 

try <a href="www.fredmiranda.com/reviews">Fred Miranda's reviews</a> for a fair number of reviews of each, generalized pricing info, and some user-submitted samples.

[graybrick]

That is not my link. try http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews

[johnson_d.]

I'd add to Larry's comment that including an 18-200mm is also an odd choice. Are you looking for a not so good at anything not so wide but flexible do it all lens or a wide angle? If you are really after a wide angle then the 10-20mm is the obvious choice from your list.

[jonathan_higa]

Thank you for point out my odd choices. Thats the exact reason I'm posting to this forum, because I am looking for guidance.

 

Perhaps I should have simply said, "these are the lenses I have now, 50mm, 28-105mm, what would be a good choice for a wide lens?"

[rainer_t]

Given you are satisfied with the quality of the 28-105, the only reasonable choice of your list is the 10-20.

 

Given you want to replace the 28-105 with a lens that is more wide (not necessarily an ultra wide) a Tamron 17-50/2.8 or a Sigma 18-50/2.8 might fit the budget.

[lorne_hampel1]

I am a real estate photographer and I own the Sigma 10-20. It is a good lens which I have used to take about 2500 pictures of building interiors.

 

I can't help you with your selection between 10mm and 17mm but I can tell you that if I had to make the choice again in the 10-20 range, I would spend the extra few dollars on the Canon 10-22 for the noticeable increase in image sharpness.

[JDMvW]

A zoom that goes to 17 or 18mm will be more wide angle than what you've got, but the effect will be like a 28mm on a full-frame camera. In the old days, that was pretty good for wide-angle and most wide-angle lenses available for range finders were only 35mm.

 

However, the 10-20mm range covers that too. I personally am very pleased with my Sigma 10-20, but of course, the more expensive Canon 10-20 is a fine lens. At this end of the range, a few mm one way or the other make much more difference in coverage than a few mm at the telephoto range.

[g dan mitchell]

If you are _primarily_ interested in covering wide angle - and I think you should be, given

your existing lenses - you should probably be looking at a lens that excels in that area

rather than one that is merely OK there.

 

Dan

[jon_worth]

FWIW, the Sigma 18-200, like any hyperzoom lens, gives up a lot in image quality and speed.

 

I briefly owned a copy and got rid of it -- too many compromises. Lesson learned.

 

Jonathan, since you (like me) use a crop camera, you might want to check out the lens tests on http://photozone.de, which are based on crop camera usage.

 

--Jon

[jonathan_higa]

Thank you for that site Jon. Very informative!