User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  4
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Wide angle zoom for 7D ii?

  1. #1
    Member AdamK's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 May 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Wide angle zoom for 7D ii?

    Big European holiday coming up. I'm upgrading my 40D to the 7D mkii and want to get a wide angle zoom lens for shooting some of the Euro landscapes.
    Apart from the very expensive 11-24 F4 which lens would you recommend for best image quality?
    (my walk around lens is the 17-55 F2.8)

    thanks for your advice.

    Adam.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2012
    Location
    Rockyview
    Posts
    2,087
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Canon EF-S 10-22 perhaps.
    Last edited by Warbler; 28-05-2015 at 8:26am.

  3. #3
    Loves The Wildlife. Mary Anne's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane Southside.
    Posts
    36,074
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why not the one you already have, its a beautiful lens that Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 I used it on my 40D all the time, that lens was make for a cropped sensor camera.
    I have not tried it on my 7D2 yet as I bought that camera for Wildlife.. I use my FF camera for Landscapes when I shoot any, so not much help there.

    Sigma make a few UWA lenses https://sigmaphoto.com.au/lenses?fie...graphy_value=2 cannot remember which one is favoured by Members here, and there is always the Canon mentioned above

    I shoot with Canon And Olympus Cameras



  4. #4
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    28 Jan 2009
    Location
    Logan Reserve, QLD
    Posts
    2,862
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Depends on how wide you want, sigma 10-20 is a great lens, and it's cheap.
    Happy to take all constructive Critique, please don't rework or edit my photos. Thanks!

    Canon 6D, 2 Canon 50D's gripped, Canon 1000D, Canon 70-200 F2.8 ( non IS),Canon 70-200 2.8, Canon 24-70 2.8, Sigma 85 1.4, Canon 50mm F1.8.. yongnuo speedlights and triggers, and manfrotto tripods.


  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter
    AdamK's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 May 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey guys,
    I'll be using the 17-55 still but I want something wider.
    The 10-22 EF-S is an obvious option but is it the best of that bunch? Happy to pay the right money for the best lens without going stupid over $1500.
    Thinking of capturing the view from top of Slovenias tallest mountain up in the alps next month.

  6. #6
    Member JJM's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Jan 2014
    Location
    Ipswich
    Posts
    355
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    From what I read when I was looking before I moved to FF the sigma 10-22 was reported to be sharper than the canon and the better option.
    Cheers
    Jeremy

  7. #7
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by yummymummy View Post
    Depends on how wide you want, sigma 10-20 is a great lens, and it's cheap.


    get the f/4-5.6 version instead of the faster f/3.5 model.

    Cheap, light, small and very good IQ.

    The other thing I've been lead to believe with the Canon 10-22 .. at 10mm you may get vignetting if you don't use a thin ring CPL.
    High quality ultra slim CPLs cost a lot more money than the std versions of the same quality CPL glass.
    With the Siggy 10-20(4-5.6 version!) a std CPL will not vignette at 10mm.

    While many people may frown upon using a CPL at an UWA focal length of 10mm .. there really is nothing wrong with doing so in a lot of situations.
    What CAN happen with using a CPL at such short focal lengths is that it may render unevenly blue skies when the sun is at a particular angle relative to the lens.(you see this a a darker blue patch in a plain blue sky).


    The other alternative to consider is not spending any money on a new lens at all, and instead using your current lens(which has a good reputation) and learning to do panorama/stitching.
    So maybe the money otherwise spent on a lens(Sigma 10-20 can be had for ~$400) could be spent on other stuff such as a good tripod(if you don't already have one) or some accessories for doing panorama/stitching.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  8. #8
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    28 Jan 2009
    Location
    Logan Reserve, QLD
    Posts
    2,862
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by arthurking83 View Post


    get the f/4-5.6 version instead of the faster f/3.5 model.

    Cheap, light, small and very good IQ.

    The other thing I've been lead to believe with the Canon 10-22 .. at 10mm you may get vignetting if you don't use a thin ring CPL.
    High quality ultra slim CPLs cost a lot more money than the std versions of the same quality CPL glass.
    With the Siggy 10-20(4-5.6 version!) a std CPL will not vignette at 10mm.

    While many people may frown upon using a CPL at an UWA focal length of 10mm .. there really is nothing wrong with doing so in a lot of situations.
    What CAN happen with using a CPL at such short focal lengths is that it may render unevenly blue skies when the sun is at a particular angle relative to the lens.(you see this a a darker blue patch in a plain blue sky).


    The other alternative to consider is not spending any money on a new lens at all, and instead using your current lens(which has a good reputation) and learning to do panorama/stitching.
    So maybe the money otherwise spent on a lens(Sigma 10-20 can be had for ~$400) could be spent on other stuff such as a good tripod(if you don't already have one) or some accessories for doing panorama/stitching.
    yep... what Arthur said ^^^

  9. #9
    Member
    Threadstarter
    AdamK's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 May 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks guys.
    already have tripod! Stitching sounds interesting, but I'm definitely going to buy an ultra wide angle lens anyway. Problem is picking best one. Many conflicting opinions online.

  10. #10
    Serial Truant.... phild's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Jun 2008
    Location
    Launceston
    Posts
    535
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Ef-S 10-18 F4.5-5.6 IS STM, cheaper than the 10-22, reported to be as sharp or sharper with the added bonus of Image Stabilisation. If there's a downside to the 10-18 it's the plastic mount, but that's no big deal IMO.

    Review and comparison with the 10-22 here http://www.camerastuffreview.com/can...10-18-vs-10-22

    All the reviews I've read have been favourable, most report it as being sharper than the 10-22 and even the 16-35L.

    Typical pricing for Australian stock for the 10-22 is just over $800, the 10-18 is less than half that at $397.
    Last edited by phild; 29-05-2015 at 9:55pm.
    Phil

  11. #11
    Member Morgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Apr 2013
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    225
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a Tokina 11-16 when I had my 7D and it was a very nice lens and worked quite well. The main reason I went with it was because it was also a F2.8 lens so great for Astro shots as well.

  12. #12
    Fishy bricat's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    777
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [IMG][/IMG]


    I just got mine and this is the first shot showing wide angle. Tiled room is 10' by 12'.


    [IMG][/IMG]


    Standing on footpath
    Cheers Brian.

    Canon 7D Kit lenses EFS 18-55 IS EFS 55-250 IS EF28-90 Canon EF 2xll Extender Sigma DG150-500 OS Speedlight 420EX. 580EX

  13. #13
    Fishy bricat's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    777
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I should have said 10-22 canon. Got called away before I could finish. cheers Brian

  14. #14
    Ausphotography Regular wideangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Sep 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    1,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You mentioned you want wide angle, so in my mind the 17-55mm isn't that wide as 17mm on a crop sensor is around 27mm. I would go and check out the Canon 10-22mm its a fantasic lens and well built and the IQ is wonderful. The next choice in terms of price point would be the Sigma 10-20mm and do check out the new Canon 10-18mm lens, its got IS, its mount may be plastic but its around half the price of the 10-22mm.
    please ask before PP my images

    "Life is what happens to you while your busy making other plans"

  15. #15
    Member
    Threadstarter
    AdamK's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 May 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for ur inputs people. Leaning towards the Canon 10-22. Or 10-18 with one of the pancakes.

  16. #16
    Ausphotography irregular Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    18,817
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Is IS needed at these focal lengths?

  17. #17
    Fishy bricat's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Apr 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    777
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It maybe not needed but certainly helps when your technique is not up to scratch. Or you are getting older? cheers Brian

  18. #18
    Ausphotography Regular wideangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Sep 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    1,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Totally helps when you want to get creative in interior areas where you are shooting say at 10mm (16mm) and you can handhold for 1 second at IS0100 for example, which would be very hard without IS and would mean bumping up ISO

  19. #19
    Member
    Threadstarter
    AdamK's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 May 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So does the benefit of IS on the 10-18 f4.5-5.6 outweigh the faster 10-22 f3.5-4.5?

  20. #20
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamK View Post
    So does the benefit of IS on the 10-18 f4.5-5.6 outweigh the faster 10-22 f3.5-4.5?
    I think it would(or could) in most situations.

    Faster aperture on an UWA lens is really only any good for the possibility of capturing 'more light'.
    In terms of DOF control, at very small focal lengths a very slight increase in maximum aperture won't give you all that much more background blur.

    i.e. say you have a 10mm f/2.8 which can obviously be set to f/4 if needed.
    Shooting this lens at f/2.8 or f/4 won't really give you a lot of difference in background blur between those two aperture values. If this lens was say an f/1.4(instead of f/2.8) then you would obviously see a lot more background blur at f/1.4.

    So in the situation of the above two mentioned lenses ... the less than 1 stop difference in max aperture gives you less than one stop difference in hand holdability .. for example in some situations where a tripod may not be allowed into some location you want to shoot in.
    Most IS systems give you approximately 3 stops of noticeable advantage in hand holdability .. so in the above scenario .. the better lens would be the one with IS, if there is a possible situation where light is at a premium.

    Of course you want to get the best possible image quality at all times, and you'd use a tripod where appropriate .. etc. But this is not always practical. The IS lens would be the better option of the two here.

    In saying that tho, another perspective on this aperture vs IS equation, is that there are some situations where the faster aperture is the advantage.
    Such a scenario could be where you are shooting moving subjects(lets say for arguments sake people).
    In a situation where the subject may be moving, the faster aperture is more of an advantage, as it allows you to shoot a faster shutter speed compared to that available with the slower aperture but IS capable lens.
    IS is not useful in such circumstances, as while it offers the shooter some advantage in minimising camera shake .. it doesn't help at all with subject movement.

    So you'd have to weigh up the number of times you find yourself shooting in one situation compared to any of the others.

    FWIW tho, it's rare to use an UWA lens to shoot fast moving subjects from close enough to make subject movement an issue.
    It's not that this has never been done .. ever!
    I once shot enthusiast level karts from about 0.5 - 1 meter away as they zoomed past me at about 80-100k/h .. all at 10mm!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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