UWA for 1DmkII

[NicD]

Hey Guys,

Looking for a Wide angle lens for my 1DmkII, the obvious choice to me was the 17-40 before i realised that the 1D is a 1.3x crop so 17mm is really not that long.

What are the options for the 1DmkII?

Around $1000 budget, anything less is a bonus!


I know there are a few out there that will have vignette for the first few mm so i am open to them too.

The main reason for the lens is that i am going over to the Kalahari Desert in a few weeks and need something for the landscapes, but also some quick portraits, which is where the 40mm would of done nicely.

What are your thoughts?

Cheers,

Nic

[Brian500au]

Hi Nic, I have used a couple of different lens but my favourite is the Sigma 12-24. It is not a fast lens but for what you pay this is a good lens. It will work on the full frame as well as the 1.3 crops.

[NicD]

Hi Nic, I have used a couple of different lens but my favourite is the Sigma 12-24. It is not a fast lens but for what you pay this is a good lens. It will work on the full frame as well as the 1.3 crops.

Thanks Brian, It doesn't look to bad although it is rather slow isn't it!

Which other lenses have you used?

[Tannin]

Slow? Who cares? This is an ultra-wide we are talking about, not a portrait lens or a super-telephoto. What do you want speed in a 12-24 for?

1: Depth of field control. At these focal lengths, you don't get any. At 12mm you have huge DOF all the time, whether you want it or not. No.

2: Low-light work without pushing the ISO. At 12 or 16mm, you can hand-hold down to insanely slow shutter speeds even without IS. At 12mm f/5.6 you can hand-hold a shot that you would battle to manage at 50mm f/2.8. No.

3: Faster focus for action photography. On a UWA? Nope. Not required. In any case, you have a very good AF system, and ultra-wides have such huge DOF that exact focus really isn't an issue.

So what's left? Honestly, I can't think of any reason why I would want a fast ultra-wide.

By the way, not really the question you asked but both my Tokina lenses (see my sig) work brilliantly on the 1D III. The Fisheye vignettes until about 13mm or so, and the 35mm macro doesn't vignette at all. I don't use the 1D III for ultra-wide, mostly it goes with the 100-400 for landscapes and a little wildlife, and I use the 20D and the 10-22 or the Tokina fish.

12-24 sounds like the obvious way top go to me. Hey - if you are going to go wide, why not go wwwwwwwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddeeeeeee?

[NicD]

Slow? Who cares? This is an ultra-wide we are talking about, not a portrait lens or a super-telephoto. What do you want speed in a 12-24 for?

1: Depth of field control. At these focal lengths, you don't get any. At 12mm you have huge DOF all the time, whether you want it or not. No.

2: Low-light work without pushing the ISO. At 12 or 16mm, you can hand-hold down to insanely slow shutter speeds even without IS. At 12mm f/5.6 you can hand-hold a shot that you would battle to manage at 50mm f/2.8. No.

3: Faster focus for action photography. On a UWA? Nope. Not required. In any case, you have a very good AF system, and ultra-wides have such huge DOF that exact focus really isn't an issue.

So what's left? Honestly, I can't think of any reason why I would want a fast ultra-wide.

By the way, not really the question you asked but both my Tokina lenses (see my sig) work brilliantly on the 1D III. The Fisheye vignettes until about 13mm or so, and the 35mm macro doesn't vignette at all. I don't use the 1D III for ultra-wide, mostly it goes with the 100-400 for landscapes and a little wildlife, and I use the 20D and the 10-22 or the Tokina fish.

12-24 sounds like the obvious way top go to me. Hey - if you are going to go wide, why not go wwwwwwwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddeeeeeee?

Very good points here, Thank you very much!

Looks like i will look into the sigma 12-24 more, although what's the difference between the 12-24 and 10-20 (besides the 4mm)?

[NicD]

Just looking at the lens again,

Can you put filters on it?

I have a cokin P-series filter holder and i cant find a filter size for it and it says something about a Rear Type (Gelatin Filter)?

Any one know what this is?

[dulvariprestige]

I tried to win a sigma 12-24 on ebay last night, but was out bid, apparently it's the widest rectilinear lens available that can be used on a FF camera, as for the filters, this seems to be the biggest con of this lens from what I've read, I also remember reading something about the rear gelatin filters, but didn't look into it.
Does the 1d accept crop sensor lenses?

[NicD]

Well i ended up buying a 17-40L, I spoke to a friend who has this combo and he loves it, so i thought why not. It is a proven lens and the 17mm will be a lot wider then the 28mm i have now, so i am happy!

Ended up getting it off E-Bay as it was $200 cheaper then anywhere else i could find it.

[JM Tran]

Well i ended up buying a 17-40L, I spoke to a friend who has this combo and he loves it, so i thought why not. It is a proven lens and the 17mm will be a lot wider then the 28mm i have now, so i am happy!

Ended up getting it off E-Bay as it was $200 cheaper then anywhere else i could find it.

the 17-40 is great for the 1.3x APS-H sensor so its a good buy for you, as the crop takes away the very piss poor performance of the lens or extreme corner on a high res full frame sensor like the 5DMKII, it just couldnt resolve enough details.

should u have bought the 12-24 Sigma though, it would have been much wider with better sharpness corner to corner, but lacks the L build quality, even though the EX lens build is still top notch.

[NicD]

the 17-40 is great for the 1.3x APS-H sensor so its a good buy for you, as the crop takes away the very piss poor performance of the lens or extreme corner on a high res full frame sensor like the 5DMKII, it just couldnt resolve enough details.

should u have bought the 12-24 Sigma though, it would have been much wider with better sharpness corner to corner, but lacks the L build quality, even though the EX lens build is still top notch.

While the extra 5mm on the wide end would of been good, i do like the extra 16mm on the long end, as it gives me more chance to use it for other things like quick portraits and candids.

To be honest i think 17mm will be wide enough for most usage, there will always be the time where i need wider/longer/faster but unfortunately i cant have it to easy, so this will do me nicely.

[Brian500au]

Thanks Brian, It doesn't look to bad although it is rather slow isn't it!

Which other lenses have you used?

I have also used the 17-40 but ended up selling it when I picked up a good deal on the 16-35. I dont use the 12-24 often but when I do it never lets me down.

The biggest problem I had with the 17-40 was the speed inside (where I would use it the most), hence buying the 16-35 to get that extra stop.

I only ever used the 12-24 in good light conditions or where i have access to a tripod.

[NicD]

I have also used the 17-40 but ended up selling it when I picked up a good deal on the 16-35. I dont use the 12-24 often but when I do it never lets me down.

The biggest problem I had with the 17-40 was the speed inside (where I would use it the most), hence buying the 16-35 to get that extra stop.

I only ever used the 12-24 in good light conditions or where i have access to a tripod.

Yeah i would take the 16-35L over the 17-40L any day, unfortunately being a student money is not the most common thing in my hands

[Brian500au]

Know the feeling Nic - have done a bit of buying and selling to get the gear I have now - just need to learn how to use it.