Advice for wide angle lens

[amber_long]

<p>So, I have my kit lens, the trusty 50mm f/1.4 lens and I'm in the market for a wider angle lens. We're going on vacation and I'd love to have something that captures more than my 50mm does. At first, I was sold on getting the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 but I read somewhere that for cropped cameras it's not really all that wide. So, now I'm considering the Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5.I hate to loose that aperture but it's a wider angle lens.<br>

Any thoughts on the two? Was my research correct on the 28-75mm not being all that wide of a lens? I'd really love to try the two lenses out but there aren't any places in my area that sell them & I don't want to dip into my savings by spending $100 to rent both lenses. Help a newbie out!</p>

[KenPapai]

<p><strong>Which Camera?</strong> __WIDE__ depends on your body.<br>

Off the cuff I always recommened the 16-35 2.8L (pricey but worth it, zero regrets)</p>

[amber_long]

<p>I'd love to go there but I'd have to save longer and won't have the money by vacation time. I have a Canon EOS XS, so not a full frame camera.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>I shoot with the Canon 10-22EFS lens, and I really like the flexibility of getting very wide for landscapes, while being able to to to 22mm, which on a traditional 35mm would have been around 35mm. The Tamron 10-24 would give you that flexibility and I think it would be a good choice. Because these lenses are so wide you really won't miss the extra stop, because at that width there is less precision to start with, unlike a telephoto where the slightest movement leaves the photo out of focus.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>The Tokina 11-16/2.8 and 12-24/4 are reputed to be very fine ultra-wide zooms, Amber, as is the Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6. The latter two can be used on crop and full frame bodies, but they are of course slower.</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>You are correct, the 28-75mm is not very wide on an XS.</p>

<p>The Tamron 10-24mm is very wide, and from what I hear it's a pretty good lens.</p>

<p>Another to consider is the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. It gets you very wide at f/2.8. Not much of a zoom range, but it's sufficient for many purposes, especially since you say you have the kit lens, which goes down to 18mm.</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>Since it doesn't sound like you are looking for a superwide angle lens, grab the Tamron 17-55 non-stabilized lens. It's super cheap ($400) and super sharp (compares quite nicely to my L primes). </p>

[tom_burke3]

<p>Currently I have the Canon 10-22 which is a good lens. Previously (when I was using Nikon) I had a Tokina 10-24mm. I took <a href="../photo/4350826">this picture</a> with it.</p>

<p>Note that both of these lenses - indeed, any wide-angle zoom - will be much bigger and heavier than the 18-55 kit lenses.</p>

 

[Marcus Ian]

<p>The Tamron 10-24 is a great UWA (ultra wide angle) zoom. I found that it's IQ was better than my EFs 10-22mm. But it <em>is very</em> wide...</p>

<p>I would consider (if you don't already have a kit lens) adding either the aforementioned Tamron 17-50 (which has equivelant FOV as a 28-80mm on FF)/2.8 (an excellent lens) or even the EF-S 18-55mm/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens (not the non IS version) if you are on a tighter budget. Both will give you a lot of flexibility in composition that the UWA zooms will not, and are <em>much</em> more suited to general shooting. </p>

[Stock-Photos]

<p>I'm happy with my Sigma 12-24, SUPER wide zoom. It's not a fast lens and front element is bulbous. I will also work on a FF body which you might acquire some day. I'ts not inexpensive. Consider a used one.</p>

<p><a href="../photo/8243626&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8243626&size=lg</a></p>

<p>I advise against acquiring too many S (crop sensor mount only) lenses.</p>

<p>BTW if your kit lens goes as wide as 18MM, as another poster says, that should be as wide as you'd need. I suspect your kit lens does not go to 18MM, or you would not be making this post.</p>

<p> </p>

[Marvin]

<p>I recently took a vacation to the national parks in Utah and Arizona. I tried to figure out which lenses to take. I decided on my Canon 10-22mm, 70-300mm and 28-135mm. Then I figured that that was too much to be dragging along.<em><strong> I bought the Tamron 18-270mm </strong></em>and left the 70-300mm and 28-135mm home. That was a great decision; the only thing wrong with my choices was that I should have left the 10-22mm home - it was totally unnecessary.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>You are correct, 28mm isn't that wide on your camera, but 10-24mm is pretty extreme. I like a lens that starts around 17mm for crop cameras and goes into the normal range. Tamron makes an acclaimed 17-50mm f/2.8 lens, as well as Canon's options; 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS, 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. These lenses will be wide enough for most cases and can also be used as 'normal' lenses. They're great walk around lenses. I had a 10-22mm for awhile and it's just too specialized. The extreme wide angle was too much and rarely got used. Just something to keep in mind. I'd either try them each out in the store to see what you like, or even better, rent one of each for a weekend.</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>+1 for Nathan's recommendations, . . . I personally have the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and it pretty much stays mounted on the camera as my "general walk around lens."</p>

[luis_g]

<p>I am in agreement with the others that recommend the Taron 17-50/2.8. Affordable, and after living wit a 50mm, it's going to look plenty wide to the OP. Also, it is a great unilens that can simply stay on your camera through a busy day and plenty of situations.</p>

[geoffs1]

<p>I'd suggest the Sigma 8-16mm.<br>

I got one this summer and I really like it.<br>

8mm is noticably wider than 10mm.<br>

<br /> Some photos:</p>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://moving-target-photos.com/samples/Sigma_8-16mm_at_C29//">http://moving-target-photos.com/samples/Sigma_8-16mm_at_C29/</a></li>

<li><a href="http://moving-target-photos.com/2011Oshkosh/slides/IMG_6694_650h.html">http://moving-target-photos.com/2011Oshkosh/slides/IMG_6694_650h.html</a></li>

<li><a href="http://moving-target-photos.com/2011Oshkosh/slides/IMG_6782_800w.html">http://moving-target-photos.com/2011Oshkosh/slides/IMG_6782_800w.html</a></li>

</ul>

[JDMvW]

<p>The older Sigma 10-20mm is somewhat cheaper than many of the suggestions so far. It is an ultrawide, and it does go nicely beyond the range of the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens. I have the Sigma and think it is a fine performer. There's a fancier new one, but they still offer the 'original'.</p>

<p>For an XS, I'm guessing you have the newer kit lens with image stabilization. If so, it is a fine lens and is wide-angle on the short end. Generations of 35mm film shooters had nothing wider (considering the 1.6X factor). You'd have to spend 3X the price to get something 2X better, if that.</p>

[wayne_campbell]

<p>I agree with JDM on the Canon 18-55mm IS version. This lens has been underrated based on the original version first released years ago. This newer and improved version got, and continues to get, great reviews at<br>

<a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/404-canon_1855_3556is_50d">http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/404-canon_1855_3556is_50d</a><br>

But if you have an overwhelming desire to spend 3 or 4 times as much then my comments won't be of much help.</p>

[ed_v.]

<p>I own the Tamron 10-24 and like it for what it is (probably the least expensive ultra wide zoom for Canon crop cameras) but I think the Sigma 10-20 that JDM mentioned above is only slightly more expensive and has better quality. If you want to check out some photos that I took with the Tamron shortly after I purchased it you can view my Picasa gallery here:</p>

<p><a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/112586344265484647474/Tamron1024F3545CanonEOSMount">https://picasaweb.google.com/112586344265484647474/Tamron1024F3545CanonEOSMount#</a></p>

<p>It has some strong distortions at 10mm and a strange flare effect (check out the photo with the sun in the frame), but otherwise I like the quality.</p>

<p>-Ed</p>

[Christa Binder]

<p>I love my Tokina 12-24 lens. I orginally had the 18-55mm kit lens (the older one, not the IS version) and it was a huge step up from that one. I think it is around $500 or $600 dollars. It is the only wide angle I have, so I cant recommend any others.</p>

[geoffs1]

<p>As much as I love my new 8-16mm Sigma (see note above), I also have to recommend the Canon 18-55mm IS. Great little lens (esp. if you stop down a bit). I've gotten magazine cover shots from that lens...</p>

[lawrence_li]

<p>The thing about getting below 17 or 16mm is that the style of the pictures is dramatically different - It's not just about getting all you can get into a frame. Another use is for dramatic size effects: You can get what seems to be a normally small subject/object and make it look really really big compared to everything else. As such, I would suggest you borrow a lens with this wide of a focal length first to see if you like it or want this type of lens.</p>

<p>It would also help to understand what you find is limiting on your current kit lens to help recommend a new one. Is it the variable aperture? Low IQ? Low AF speed? Kit lenses are decent for most pictures and they are (in general) relatively light compared to fixed aperture zooms. Depending on your answers, might you consider a 24mm, 28mm or 35mm prime instead?<br>

That said, I can vouch for the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. The larger aperture is also helpful for photos in lowlight situations such as museums or buildings.</p>

[danielleetaylor]

<p>Ultimate sharpness and fine detail: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8</p>

<p>Pretty darn good even if it's not quite the Tokina wide open: Canon 10-22</p>

<p>Fantastic general purpose / walk around zoom: Canon 15-85</p>

[plangereis]

<p>I had the Canon 10-22 while I was a shooting with my 40D, and it was a superb lens in terms of sharpness, and color rendition. I bought a used one for about $600 Canadian. Considering this lens retails for around $900, I figured what I paid was a steal. Now that i am shooting with a 5D, I am using the 17-40L and like it. I do miss my 10-22 though!</p>

[david_wu6]

<p>If your vacation is not in the city, research the Samsung 14mm F2.8 with a few brands, like Rokinon in US. Cheap ($360 at AMZN) with very good quality (optical and construction). It's full manual though.</p>