Wide angle lens

[bill_k5]

<p>Anyone have a suggestion for a nice wide angle lens for a 7D? I was talking to a friend that is a pro photographer (Nikon user). He suggested that I look at a nice wide angle lens since I like to photograph landscapes as well as wild life. Thank you in advance. Bill </p>

[mike_corndog]

<p>Heya Bill, a few constraints would be nice ($$$, zoom/prime, etc), but I'd be happy to throw out some ideas. :)<br>

I'd probably go with the 17-40 if I wanted something that was fairly wide, a decent walkaround, and worked on full frame. I'd probably go with the 17-55 if I wanted something that was a fairly wide, a good walkaround, and had no plans of going full frame in the near future. If you were after an ultrawide, they're all pretty good at f/8, so I would personally have more flexibility there. The 10-22 is good, the Tamron 11-18 is good, the Sigma and Tokina 12-24 is good, and so on. I had a bad copy of the Sigma 10-20, but I've seen some great copies around. Also, the Sigma 12-24 is <em>the</em> ultrawide to have if you plan on going full frame.</p>

[spencer_chrouser]

<p>A few to consider:</p>

<p>Canon 17-55<br /> Canon 15-85 (I use this one and it's great)<br /> Canon 10-22<br /> Canon 17-40 or 16-35 ( If you don't shoot super wide these may fit your purposes)<br /> Tokina 11-16<br /> Tokina 12-24<br /> Tamron 10-24<br /> Tamron 11-18<br /> Sigma 10-20<br /> Sigma 8-16<br /> Sigma 12-24</p>

<p>If I was in your position I would probably get the 11-16 Tokina. I've heard nothing but great things about it and it's supposedly the best uwa you can get for a crop sensor at the moment. There's also the 15-85. That's what I use right now and I like it a lot. Plus you have the added benefit of not just having a wide angle, but a good general purpose lens. I would own the Tokina 11-16 right now, but I plan to upgrade from my 7D to a 5D Mark II soon, so I'll be getting the 17-40.</p>

<p>You can also compare all the lenses at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&Lens=404#.TgkZvs1Gu2A</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I have the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5, and I'm very happy with it on my 7D when I need UWA.</p>

[jeff_bubis]

<p>I have the 17-55/2.8 and the 11-16/2.8. These are, IMHO, the best zoom combination for Canon crop sensor bodies. They are so good that they are part of the reason I opted for the 7D instead of a 5DM2 when I upgraded from my 40D as the FF equivalent to the 17-55 (24-70/2.8L) doesn't have IS. The build quality of the Tokina is fantastic. The IQ of both is the best you can get short of a prime. You would not be disappointed with either.</p>

[randallfarhy]

<p>Duplicated :(</p>

[randallfarhy]

<p>Bill, I don't have anything wider than the 24-105F4, but-<br />If true landscape work is what you're interested in then I would first recommend either the Tokina 11-16 (seems to get nothing but rave reviews and a lot of recommendations. This is a lens that I have tried to aquire when the funds were available but my favorite source was out of stock on) or the Canon 10-22. Reason being the crop factor of 1.6 on your 7D. An 11-16 becomes IN EFFECT a 17.6-25.6, a suitable landscape range.<br />Anything longer and you're entering the range of a general purpose/ wide portrait/ street lens when used on your 7D, such as the 24-70 F2.8 or 24-105F4.</p>

[peter_j2]

<p>May I suggest a Carl Zeiss Compact Prime CP.2 lens. It is designed with interchangeable mounts for your HDSLR.<br /><br />http://www.expandore.com/product/add/Lenses/Carl_Zeiss/Compact_Prime_CP2_Lenses.htm</p>

[kazwiltshire]

<p>HI Bill I have both the 10-22 and the 17-55 2.8 Both are great lenses but for me the 17-55 is more versitile. </p>

[paddler4]

<p>Depends on how wide you want to go. For most landscape work, you don't need fast glass, so that opens doors. On a 7D, there is a substantial difference between 17 and 15mm, so I opted for the EF-S 15-85, which I like a great deal. (NOT the 17-85, which is an older, cheaper, much less high quality lens.) However, it is slow, and if you want really wide, it won't do the trick. If you are, like me, old enough to think in 35mm film camera terms, it is equivalent to 24 mm on a film camera. Wide enough for me, but not for a lot of people.</p>

[david israel]

<p>10-22 has become one of my favorites.</p>

[David_Cavan]

I will echo David Israel's comment - i really like using the 10-22 regularly. Wide enough to get dramatic results and well

enough built to take some punishment.

[dcstep]

<p>Look for a lens that your RAW conversion software will correct automatically, adjusting for geometric distortion, chromatic aberration, contrast, vignetting, etc. that wide-angle lenses are prone to exhibit, particularly zooms. LightRoom, DxO's Optics Pro and other softwares make these corrections at every focal length and every aperture. The end result can be a huge improvement over your uncorrected lenses.</p>

<p>Not all lens-body combinations are supported by these softwares, but, for instance, most of the Canon lenses will be supported with the various Canon bodies. On the software sites you can see which lens/body combinations are supported.</p>