Wide-Angle Lens Decision

[roberto_lins]

Hi all, I've been reading a lot the comments/discussions about wide

angles as well Bob Atkins review (I'm a EOS user, BTW). Actually it

really helped me a lot and I'm (or was) decided to get the Canon 20mm

f/2.8. The f/2.8 is not a priority, but might be useful since I like

also to shoot at caverns, pictographs as well under dense vegetation.

However, I saw that Tokina has a NEW 17mm f/3.5, the "Pro ATX". It

uses a 77mm filter size and apparently is an all glass aspherical lens

element. It also uses some HLD elements (I don't know how many) and a

floating element. The lens sounds great and the price is comparable

to the Canon 20mm(!). Would anyone have a comment about this lens?

Yet, would any EOS user know if it's eye control focus consistent?

Thanks a lot,

[photojim]

I can't help you about the Tokina, but as far as whether you want a 17mm or a 20mm lens, what is your widest lens right now?

 

Since you own Canon gear, another attractive option is the 20-35/3.5-4.5.

 

Jim

[roberto_lins]

Thanks Jim. I own a 28mm. Actually I thought about the

Canon 20-35 mm f/3.5-4.5, but between this and the 20 mm, I think

I rather get the last one. I read in here (photo.net) that the 20mm

would be a bit more difficult to use, but also would produce less flare and present a better performance when used under low-light conditions. The difference in the price is not *that* much. I short, if I don't get any nice feedback about the Tokina lens, I won't take the risk, i.e., I'll stick with Canon...

[chris_newkumet]

Roberto:

 

stick with Canon...the interface between Tokina and EOS systems apparently is far from perfect. BTW, I own the EF20-35 and love it -- very versatile and sharp as a tack.

[ShunCheung]

A repeating theme here recently is to stick with camera brand lenses, be it Canon, Minolta, Nikon or whatever. You'll never know when your third-party lens will stop working with a new camera body, with a new teleconvertor (which isn't a problem for wide angles), extension tube, etc.

 

Unlike a 28mm, a 20mm is a very wide lens. I have had one for years but never used it much until recently; it was simply too wide for my taste until the last year or so. A 17mm is even more extreme. I think either the 20mm/f2.8 Canon or the 20-35 zoom would be a good choice. I am not a Canon user, but the EOS 20-35mm/f3.5-4.5 is supposed to be a real bargain and gives you the flexability from very wide to not so wide.

[photojim]

I would get the 20 if you don't already have a 24. The difference between 20 and 28 is fairly significant. If you already had a 24, a 20 would be very nice but a 17 might be a better choice.

 

For what it's worth, I got a 20-35/2.8 and I'm going to eventually get a 16 or 17, but not for a few years I'm sure.

 

Jim

[bobatkins]

Depending on how you shoot, a 17mm may be a bit wide. I have both a Canon 20-35 zoom and a Tamron 17/3.5. I just find I don't use the 17mm much. Too wide for my taste. In fact if anyone wants a mint condition manual focus Tamron 17/3.5 lens (fits any camera via the adaptall mount system), let me know!

[shayok_mukhopadhyay]

After owning a 28/2.8 for some time (and taking some interesting pictures with it), I was thinking of getting something wider. I hedged my bets and bought the 20-35/3.5-4.5; this is a huge range, and encourages me to experiment with perspective. Sure, flare must be a worse problem than with a prime, but if you're really shooting into the sun, you'll probably need a hat/hand/umbrella with both. It's cheaper than the 20mm, and you wont feel such a chump if you're not using the 20mm too much. The half-stop advantage will not be significant most of the time, as you'd probably want some DOF, and you can shoot at 1/20. 17mm might be a bit of a speciality lens.

[gregory_rogalsky1]

My experience with off brand lens has been really good so far. I have owned a couple of Tamrons 17 f4 and a 300 f2.8ED . When I was shopping for wide angles ,I compared the nikon 18f4 againts the tamron 17f4 and the tamron had less flar than the Nikkor, go figure.As for your situaion , if you can test both lens at a camera store and compare for your self. These way you can see for yourself. Its funny I just bought a used 20mm f2.8 manual focus and Im about to buy a 24mmf1.4L for my canon system for far less money than a new canon wide angle zoom. As for slow wide angle zooms I would stay away. Its hard to beat fast wide angle primes for sharpness and ease of focus.

[john_sully]

I owned one for several years and was very pleased with it's performance. Very sharp when stopped down -- almost the only way I used a wide ange -- but a bit flare prone when shooting into the sun. You definitely need to use a hat or some other device to shade the front of the lens. Plus, it is small, light and reasonably cheap for the quality.

 

I'd offer to sell it to you, but it's already gone. I just got a 17-35/2.8L!