Super wide lens for crop and FF

[nail33]

<p><!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } --><br>

<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } --></p>

<p >I have a XTi (400D) and am currently using a Zenitar 16mm f2.8 fish-eye for my wide angle lens. It works very well considering the price (a real bargain), but it's a pain to d-fish some of the badly distorted pictures. Most though, are fine as is.</p>

<p >I'm planning to upgrade and possibly buy the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, as it will also work on a FF (at 15-16mm) which I may move up to in the future. I know it gets great reviews, and many say it's better (and cheaper) than the Cannon 10-22mm. I'm not interested in EF-S lenses. Most quality super-wide primes (which I would prefer) for crops are too expensive (ie. Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM). Many of the owners of the Tokina consider it to be a prime because of the short zoom range.</p>

<p >My question is about Samyang lenses. Is anyone familiar with their quality and reputation? I just saw this news clip on Dpreview about a “soon to be released” Samyang 14mm f2.8. Here's the link:</p>

<p ><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09091801samyung14mm.asp">http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09091801samyung14mm.asp</a></p>

<p >It says that it will work on both crop and FF cameras and will be under $400. I know that it is probably a manual focus, but I don't find that an issue with super-wide lenses. Should I consider this lens, or is Samyang junk compared to Tokina? Thanks in advance for your responses.</p>

 

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>It will be manual focus and everything else that Samyang has made probably qualifies as junk. Whether or not this lens will be different... well I doubt anyone really knows. A 14/2.8 will be difficult to pull off, but with modern software and industrial processes, there is no reason why they couldn't do it. </p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>A couple other lenses to consider... The Sigma 14mm f/2.8 is out of production, but can be found used in the $400-$500 range. I haven't used it, but I've seen excellent reviews. It's a full frame lens. The Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 is full frame for the whole zoom range. I have used this lens on full frame, and the view is quite amazing. It is fairly expensive, though - over $800 new.</p>

<p>As for Samyang, I don't know anything about them... I'd wait for reviews...</p>

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>It will be manual focus and everything else that Samyang has made probably qualifies as junk.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Manual focus isn't such a problem at 14mm. Infinity starts at 2 meters or so.<br /> All three new Samyang lenses (85/1.4, 8/3.5 fish, 14/2.8) have had very positive reviews and sample images look very good. Why do you think they're junk? (I have no idea about their older stuff.)<br /> I played around with couple of 14/2.8 samples shot with D3X and they're very good considering 250€(!) price and 14mm on 24Mp 35mm sensor.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Many of the owners of the Tokina consider it to be a prime because of the short zoom range.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There's a huge difference between 11 and 16mm. I wouldn't dream calling it a prime... I'd call it 11 and 16mm primes. ;)</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>ALWAYS BUY FOR THE CAMERA YOU HAVE NOW. Get the Canon 10-22mm for your current body and when you go FF you can sell the 10-22 and get the EF 17-40 f/4 for pretty much an even trade and it will be almost identical focal length as the 10-22 on a crop sensor.</p>

[jimstrutz]

<p>I agree with Nathan. Buy lenses for the camera you have now, not for what you think you might get someday. The only time this doesn't make sense is when you are nearly certain you will be changing camera formats in the near future. If your planned upgrade is more than a year off, get what works best now, and sell it if you ever really do upgrade. Otherwise you will be stuck with poor choices for now, that may be worse choices for later.</p>

<p>The Tokina 11-16 might work on a full frame. I had the Tokina 12-24 and it covered full frame down to about 19mm. But the image quality at the edges when shooting full frame were nothing to write home about. They cleaned up a bit by 24mm, but it was still not great. I don't think this is going to be a good compromise for full frame, and I bet you start thinking about trading it in if you do get the full frame camera. On the other hand, it's a fine lens for crop cameras, so it still makes good sense to buy now.</p>

 

[nail33]

<p><!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } --></p>

<p >Thank you for your responses.</p>

<p >Nathan & Jim:</p>

<p >Your probably right about the EF-S lenses, but I'm still smarting from the burning that Canon gave me when they left me high and dry with my FD lenses. I spent many hundreds of dollars on Canon FD lenses, including their wonderful 50mm f1.4 which can now be bought on e-bay for $9.99. Hopefully I'm a little smarter and wiser now. I'm betting the FF will be around longer than APS-C. I realize every format is a risk, but these FD paperweights that are now gathering dust, make my stomach churn every time I see them. I paid over $500 for my A-1 body in the early 80s (a lot of money when I was a kid) and took wonderful Kodachrome ASA 25 slide pictures with my FD lenses. I have yet to take a picture with my digitals that can compare. Now Kodak has abandoned their finest film. I moved to digital when the cost of film became prohibited compared to digital. I had hoped though, some of my camera equipment could be used with the newer gear. Wrong! Not even my Canon flash. Whoops, I forgot, my tripod still works. I'm surprised they didn't change the thread size so that wouldn't work either. Oh my God! I just looked on e-bay again and saw my same Canon A-1, with three Canon lenses, Canon flash, and camera case, for $5.50. I think I'm going to throw-up. Sorry about the rant, but I think you can see where I'm coming from when I say I'm leery about buying EF-S lenses.</p>

[jimstrutz]

<p>Well, I think EF-S will be here for quite a while, but nothing lasts forever. The M42 screw mount lenses I started with can still be used with adapters, but I don't find that practical, so I don't bother. BTW, Canon FD & FL mount lenses can now be used on 4/3 digital cameras (Olympus & Panasonic) with the appropriate adapter. Alas, I sold my FT-b, A-1 and AE-1, along with all the matching glass when autofocus became the rage. Anyway, I view cameras as tools that are built to be used, and replaced when they are no longer the tool of (my) choice.</p>

<p>Also, most Canon A series and earlier flash units can still be used on Canon digital cameras. Of course they will be manual and autoflash exposure only, but that's all they did on the A-1 anyway.</p>

[greg_wachman]

<p>As an owner of the EF-S 10-22mm, I have very happy with this lens. I appreciate the flexibility of the zoom over a prime (or the short zoom Tokina) - I have learned that not all subjects are suited to 10mm, and often something longer is ideal. If pure sharpness is your goal and you don't care about having this flexibility, the Tokina is probably a good choice. However - it was also designed for APS-C sensor size and therefore will vignette substantially on a full frame body, at least on the wide end. So don't think that you're getting a great deal just because the lens mount is different.</p>

<p>It appears to me that high quality EF-S lenses such as the 10-22mm are holding their value well on the used market, and I will not hesitate to buy additional high quality EF-S lenses as long as FF bodies are not within my price range. Even when full frame bodies are affordable to me, it is likely they will still not be affordable to beginners, so I have confidence that a market will remain for EF-S lenses for the forseeable future. The switch from FD to EOS was wholesale for the entire Canon system - the two mounts could not coexist because of their mutual incompatibility. However, EF and EF-S lens lines are designed for different markets and there is one-way compatibility, so they coexist without a problem.</p>