User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  4
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Opinions sought - wide angle zoom lenses - for Canon 650D

  1. #1
    Member Divine's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Dec 2012
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Opinions sought - wide angle zoom lenses - for Canon 650D

    Dear all,

    I want a lens that will best let me capture the feel of a building - such as a church - when you first enter.

    So far I have worked out that I need a wide angle lens and think there are 4 main options

    1. Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC HSM - approx $410

    2. Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM - approx $535
    3. Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5~4.5 USM Zoom Lens - approx $600
    4. Sigma 8-16 mm F/4.5-5.6 DC HS - approx $590


    It appears to me that the difference between lens 1 and lens 2 is mainly the level of light they will work with. Lens 3 at 10 mm would appear close to lens 2 at 10 mm on the same basis. Lens 4 would seem to have wider angle than the others but require higher light levels.

    If I am going into a relatively dark church - which is going to give me the best result?

    Regards

    Gordon

  2. #2
    In Training MarkChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Jan 2008
    Location
    Widgee,
    Posts
    2,256
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yep, you are the right track.

    The siggy 10-20 constant f3.5 will obviously give you the best light gathering ability, but at the sacrifice if some DoF

    The 8-16 is w-i-d-e no really it is very w---i---d---e
    Smoke Alarms Save Lives, Install One Today
    I shoot Canon
    Cheers, Mark


  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jan 2012
    Location
    Rham
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You may want to consider the Canon 16 – 35mm f/2.8L II USM it's more exxie than the others, but it will give you excellent IQ & at f2.8, great Low Light performance. Sorry, just looked at $1600 it is quiet a bit more than the others you are looking at. Great lens tho.
    gb From GB
    C&C is more than welcome, it's encouraged.

  4. #4
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,647
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    The 8-16 is also not rectilinear (from memory here) so that means it will create a fish-eye effect at the 8mm end (less so at the 16mm) that will need to be corrected in editing software unless you want your photo to look like the result from a fish-eye lens
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    03 Feb 2012
    Location
    Swan Hill
    Posts
    293
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Gordon,

    You forgot one very good lens and thats the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, when i looked at the different lenes available for landsacpes etc, I finally settled
    on the Tokina 11-16 its a very nice lens and if I need to use it in low light I can with ease.

    I did buy my lens Grey market from a Site Sponser too, hope this helps.

  6. #6
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Read all about it. And while there, check out Σ's RRP against your bargain.
    And ...
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    The 8-16 is also not rectilinear (from memory here) so that means it will create a fish-eye effect at the 8mm end (less so at the 16mm) that will need to be corrected in editing software unless you want your photo to look like the result from a fish-eye lens
    It certainly IS rectilinear.

    About the only drawback - as indicated in another similar thread by statitica - is that this lens is not a Full Frame one.
    A------------------m. (As seen through an 8-16.)
    Last edited by ameerat42; 30-12-2012 at 9:30am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    16 Nov 2010
    Location
    Logan Village
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    More light the better. In some buildings they will not allow tripods.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Oct 2012
    Location
    Ipswich
    Posts
    409
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have also been looking into purchasing a wide for my 60d, and along with the abovementioned lenses, I am also considering a Tamron SP AF 10-24 3.5-4.5 @ around $500.
    Draw back is, I can't find lens locally and would have to bring it in from OS.
    Is there a particular reason why you didn't consider the Tamron SP?
    Ray
    60D 5Diii


  9. #9
    Ausphotography irregular Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    18,836
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ^ thanks for adding to my list, as I'm also at this stage. Also have Gordon's 1,2 &3 mentioned lens on that list. So add the Tokina 12-24 f/4 to your list.
    "Enjoy what you can do rather than being frustrated at what you can't." bobt
    Canon 80D, 60D, Canon 28-105, Sigma 150-600S.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, qld
    Posts
    22
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The IQ of the Canon 10-22mm is very good, about the same as the 17-40L on full frame. You should also get good resale on it should you decide to go full frame later on.
    Canon 60D + Canon 5D + mk 2 | EF 50 1.8, EF 70-300mm IS, EF 100mm macro, EF 35-135mm, EF 24-105L | EF 17-40L |
    Tamron 17-55mm 2.8

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Jul 2010
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If your wallet could handle it , This would be nice : http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx , No more vertical distortion , But at a cost
    Canon : 30D, and sometimes the 5D mkIII , Sigma 10-20, 50mm 1.8, Canon 24-105 f4 L , On loan Sigma 120-400 DG and Canon 17 - 40 f4 L , Cokin Filters




  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Oct 2010
    Location
    Greenwich
    Posts
    1,708
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I vote for the Tokina.
    I had exactly the same dilema when looking for a UWA for my 60D and after trying a number of lenses I settled for the Tokina 11-16 F2.8

    It is not only sharp, but has great colours and contrast.

    I even use it on my full-frame 5D3, and if set above 15mm, has virtualy no vignetting.
    All my photos are taken with recycled pixels.
    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
    Wisdom, is knowing not to serve it in a fruit salad.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,712
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok lets mix it up a little - Either of the Tokina's will do you, but do you need it that wide? If you do, then maybe F2.8 or a solid prime, 24 mm or similar. William W is a strong believer in the primes, and this might be a lens for you, with Ap's ranging F2 or larger. Sigma has a 20mm F1.8 DG class lens, maybe do some digging on reviews on the Sigi primes.

    I have two Sigmas, the 10 - 20 mm F4 - F5.6 and A 18 - 50 mm F2.8, which takes some fantastic images. I also have the 17 - 35 mm F2.8 for my FF body, but my most used lens on my 50D for landscape, is by far the 18 - 50mm F2.8. In saying that though, the 10 - 20 copes a flogging at times, and I have not found it wanting for extra light, but I haven't shot inside a building/church without use of a steadying device.

    There will be some series options for you, have you got a price bracket to work to?

    If looking a Sigma, get your best Online Grey price and the CRKennedy.com.au price match is available in OZ for an OZ lens. Go to their site, and type in Price match into their search box.
    They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
    "My Flickr Site"
    Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm
    " I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
    CC is always appreciated.


  14. #14
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Divine's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Dec 2012
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Dear All

    Thank you so much for your comments. I'm not so sure how this forum works so I am responding once rather than individually.

    Obviously I do need a wide lens and the budget is around $600. But thanks for the other suggestions.

    I was impressed by the spec of the Tokina 11-16 because of its low light capacities. It is really difficult to decide between 114 degrees of view at F4 of the Sigma or 104 degrees at F2.8 of the Tokina. IN the end I went with the Sigma.

    With respect to Tamron, they were cheaper but lots of the reviews I saw were less positive about the relative quality.

    I've had the chance to hold and play with a similar Sigma lens thanks to a family member and it felt and performed very well so I will go with that brand.

    There was lots of interesting comment about pricing. I don't want to fall foul of the forums rules about spam so I will be circumspect. The CRKennedy avenue was interesting - it wasn't actually price matching even though it seemed to be from what I read - they offered the lens I ended up purchasing for $627 (delivered) from an "authorised" vendor (on eBay) which I eventually bought for $578 delivered from a forum sponsor. I expect few problems with high quality equipment so the attractions of an extra year warranty didn't seem worth it.

    I also noticed that over a week the price ex Hong Kong jumped around a lot - clearly prices are quite dynamic based on the $AUD which is up a bit at the moment.

    Once again, thanks to all who commented.

    Regards

    Gordon

  15. #15
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    16,827
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sounds like the 8-16, was it?
    Am.

  16. #16
    Member
    Threadstarter
    Divine's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Dec 2012
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes it was the Sigma 8~16. Arrived quickly and seems to work well. Great angle of view and no obvious linear distortion I can see in the photograph. And it feels like a high quality product.

    Next challenge will be to find a flash unit to work with it for interior shots.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •