inexpensive wide angle lenses?

[annie_d]

I am somewhat new to the world of digital SLRs and do not know much about lenses. I have a Canon 40d along with

the kit lens the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and also a 50mm f/1.8. I am in college and am looking into getting an

inexpensive good-quality wide angle lens with a particularly low stop. I was looking at the 24mm f/2.8, the 28mm

f/2.8, and the 35mm f/2 and wasn't sure about the image quality/appearance of the three. I wasn't too sure about

the 28mm though because I do have the 28-135mm and I don't want to get a lens that can do basically what my zoom

lens can do at full aperture. I've only shot Canon lenses but I'm open to other suggestions. :]

[richterjw]

I never found that I really thought the difference between 24mm and 28mm was enough. So I bought a 20mm 2.8 for my Canon A-1 (FD mount). I have used the 20mm and 50mm lenses exclusively for the last 5 years. I don't suggest that this would be best for everyone. But have done a good bit of travel with just that setup, I don't feel like I'm missed much by not having more versatility. The only real negative about the EF 20mm is the older (but good) design, which lacks USM focus. They can be found relatively inexpensively though. JR

[photo_dark]

on a crop body (40D) wide-angle is typically 10-30 (not 17-50 as it is on a film camera or full frame digital). That being said, check out the tokina 11-16 f2.8. I think it's relatively inexpensive and has gotten fairly good reviews from what i've read.

 

Your other options include the Sigma 10-22 f4-5.6 (inexpensive, but not a very wide aperture) Tamron 12-24 F4 (reasonably large aperture for an inexpensive lens), tokina 12-24 and of course a whole slew of 17-50ish lenses made by canon/tamron/tokina/sigma.

[bobatkins]

Those primes aren't wideangles for your camera.

 

I'd suggest the EF-S 18-55 if money is tight, and the EF-S 10-22 if you can afford it. There's also a Sigma 10-20 which isn't too bad, a Tamron 11-18 and a Tokina 12-24.

 

18mm is the start of wide, 15mm is a good and useful wide focal length and 10/12 mm is in the ultrawide range for the 40D.

 

I use a 24/2.8 as my "normal" lens!

[annie_d]

Thanks all. I will look into those.

[jimstrutz]

Yeah, if you want wide, and shoot with a 40D, you have to get below 24mm. 24mm is hardly wide at all. 20mm is wide, but not REAL wide. If you were shooting with a full frame camera it would be different, but you have a crop frame camera, and have to choose lenses accordingly.

 

Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a killer lens. Tamron, Sigma and Tokina f/2.8 lenses are good as well, but don't focus as fast and lack Image Stabilization. Pick one.

 

David B. listed most of the available very wide selection available now. They are all good, but my preference for a Canon camera would be the Canon 10-22. It's hard to beat.

[ben_quinn1]

I own a 40d and I would say if you want to shoot wide and have lots of lens options then trade the 40d for a 5d, it really is the only option. Otherwise you are restricted to some pretty average zoom lens like the 10-22mm which is pretty pricey, if you are happy with that then stick with it.

[derrickdehaan]

Look up the tests and reviews on the Tokina 11-16 2.8.....then try to find one available.

 

Derrick

[nail33]

I have a 400D and use a Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 “fish-eye” as my wide-angle lens. If you don't mind manual focus, this lens is a bargain (around $125-150). With a crop factor of 1.6, the distortion isn't usually all that bad, and you can always fix that when you PP. Bob Atkins has a review of this lens.

[aubreyp]

Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4 -about $250 used.

[thomas_hardy1]

I recently bought a Sigma 10-20 for my 20D. That lens is plenty wide. You can find images taken with it all over the

place.

[jay a. frew]

Hello Annie:

 

I would not call the EF-S 10-22 a "pretty average" zoom (as mentioned above). I have that lens and it is as good

as my EF17-40L. It

is not all that fast, and, it is pricey.

 

With that out of the way, I think "inexpensive, fast, good quality" and "wide angle" (especially for a 40D) is a

tough combo to find. Even 24mm will only give you an equivalent view of 38mm on that camera. You might have to

be patient and save for a bit.

 

While you are saving your money, here is a link to a web site where you can compare lenses and lens quality:

 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

 

And, for when you get the irresistible urge to buy a cheap lens, here is a link to a lens rental place (if your

are in the USA) that both my daughter and I have used with good outcomes:

 

http://www.lensrentals.com/category/wide-angle/for-canon

 

Rent a different lens for a few days, every month or two (the wide angle lenses + insurance don't cost much to

rent), have some fun, and learn more about what you need/like. That might be better than spending quite a bit of

money on a cheap lens that you may grow to dislike.

 

Oh, and don't let the "kit lens" moniker lead you to believe that the 28-135 is a sub-par lens. Remember that the

EF 24-105L ($1100.00) was also a "kit lens". While the 28-135 is not Canon's best offering, in the film days it

was well

regarded and it still gets very good reviews (see link below). I use it on a 40D (an on a film camera) and I

find it to be pretty darn good. Take some time to learn its strengths and weaknesses.

 

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/139/cat/11

 

Cheers! Jay

[denisbergeron]

What inexpensive is for you ? And what kind of learning to you want to do ? <br>

You can have older Pentax Screw Mount (m42) 20mm f3.5 for 100$. <br>

<a href="http://rugift.com/photocameras/mir_20m_lens_for_canon_eos.htm">Or you can get a russian mir 20mm f3.5

with EOS mount for 180$</a> <br>

<a href="http://rugift.com/photocameras/mir_20m_lens.htm">Or event the same with m42 for 149$</a> plus <a

href="http://rugift.com/photocameras/canon-eos-adapter-focus-confirm.htm"> the focus confirmation adaptor

for another 50$</a> <br>

I give rugift as a link, but you can get it elsewhere also. Search for the lens in google.

[alan_myers]

Hi Annie,

 

I'd suggest you steer clear of lenses that fall within the range your current lens covers, since that doesn't really expand your shooting potential at all.

 

And, there are precious few prime wide angle lenses for crop sensor bodies.

 

20mm is only marginally wide. I have and use the Canon 20/2.8, but it's sort of like a 35mm lens on a film/full frame camera.

 

Canon's 14mm is way expensive. There were some third party 14mm to, Sigma and Tamron. I'm not sure if either still makes them. They were less expensive than the Canon, still not cheap though. But both compromised image quality quite a bit from what I understand.

 

There was a Tokina 17mm f3.5 made for the Canon EF mount some years ago. It's a bit rare and pricey as a used item now and I don't know how good image quality is with it. Besides, 17mm isn't particularly wide, either. It gives an angle of view just slightly wider than a 28mm lens will on film/full frame. Mildly wide.

 

The fisheye lenses are about the only alternatives to the above. With those, unless you want the fisheye look with curved lines and all, you'll also need software to "de-fish" the images. I'm not sure how much that would cost, in addition to the lens.

 

Probably about the best value lens is the Tokina 12-24/4 zoom.

 

It's pretty darned wide on a crop sensor camera, the focal length range it covers dovetails very nicely with your 28-135 and at under $500 it's about the best priced, very good build quality & excellent image quality lens. You might find it for a little less used, but not much. It's a popular lens. For comparison, the Canon EF-S 10-22 is excellent too, a little wider, but about $700 without the lens hood. The Tokina includes a matched lens hood.

 

The Toki 11-16 is faster, but a more limited focal length range and more expensive than the Toki 12-24. But, it's only 1mm wider and how much do you really need f2.8 with an ultrawide lens.

[richard_crowe4]

This is a great lens at a good price. It dovetails beautifully with the 28-135mm IS lens. I once used the 20mm f/2.8

lens as a backup to my 28-135mm. It is wide enough for most of my shooting since I am not a great fan of wide

lenses but, the extra 3mm wider of a 17mm is night and day difference.

 

17mm is reasonably wide. I am very happy using my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens paired up with the 70-200mm f/4L IS on

a second body as my go-to general photography and travel kit. However, that lens is pretty pricey. The Tamron 17-

50mm f/2.8 is a great lens and runs about $420. As a really cheap (and perhaps temporary) fix to your wide angle

needs, the 18-55mm Kit Lens can be had on the used market for about $50-$60.