Wide Angle Lens

[tw70]

I am very new to photography and i am hoping you guys can give me some advice on a good mid range
wide angle lens for my Canon 550d

I am interested in Macro and Landscape at the moment so if any one can help will be
greatly appreciated

[larrywen]

15-85 IS is a possible choice. For macro, a 60mm Macro is very cheap, or you'd like 100mm with or without L.

[5hogun]

If you are serious about landscapes, perhaps an ultrawide like the Sigma 10-20, Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16 or 12-24 are all good options, with the tokina 11-16 being a favourite amongst many.

+1 on the above 60mm macro. It's a brilliant little lens whose optics truly stunning. It's one of my favorites, along with the tokina 35mm macro.

[William W]

1. What lens(es) do you have at the moment.
2. What (specific) difficulties are you having making landscape photos with it/them?

Macro is another issue and there are many possibilities:

3. Of what generally do you think you want to take macro pictures?
For example outside Flowers and big bugs that don’t bite or inside your stamp collection and old coins and diamond rings or venomous spider which you do not want to approach?


WW

[Cyza]

Just to make it clear quickly your not gonna be able to find a good lens that does both Macro and Landscapes.

since a variety of wide angle lenses have been suggested, and I have little to no experience with them I won't add anything in regards to them.

as for a macro Lens I would strongly recommend the Tamron 90 mm F2.8.
it maybe a slightly bias choice being the owner of one and not having tried any other macro lenses but here are a few reasons why.

One of the cheapest true 1:1 macro lenses
unlike the 60mm canon, you'll be able to keep it if you ever do go Full Frame.
The F2.8 makes it a great portrait lens
The longer 90mm focal range, is great for insects, and easier to use if you ever purchase extension tubes for it.
Has relatively good AF for an entry level Macro lens, is not extremely noisy and slow like some other comparable models (Sigma)

hope that helps some what.

[tw70]

I have the Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens, the standard 55-250mm and 18-55mm.

I really want to focus on insects, flowers and landscapes.

I have been doing some research on the sigma 10-20, but would like to know if i should perhaps pay the extra for the canon equivalent?

Do not know anything about the Tokina 11-16, so will do some research.

Are the Kenko extension tubes worth purchasing?


Thanks for all your advice

[LJG]

Paying the extra for a Canon lens is a question that is asked many many times. Plenty say go Sigma, as many say go Canon. Personally, I have the Canon 10-22 and it takes absolutely stunning quality photo's. I do minimal PP, I mean very minimal, usually just resize and convert as I use a custom setting in camera for sharpness and contrast. You do not hear of many people who spend the extra on the Canon having buyers remorse, that says volumes in itself.

[peterb666]

It is wise to look into the review sites to compare lens performance. I know plenty with the Sigma 10-20mm lenses and the Tokina 11-16 and hear only praise. I am in the Nikon camp so cannot comment on the 10-22 Canon. Virtually all the Canon cropped sensor owners I know use either the Sigma or Tokina.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[William W]

Thanks for answering my questions.

I extrapolate that one main criterion is you want something wider than the 18mm you have ATM.
I have not used any of the three lenses you mention but do have friends who either swear by the Canon or the Tokina – all the Tokina users like both its price and also the non varying (fast) maximum aperture – if I were choosing, the non varying max. aperture would feature large in my choice. . . but so would final image quality.

***

You seem to have a majority of the macro nailed with that one lens – it is a cracker and should handle all that subject matter adequately.

Yes, IMO the Kenko tubes are a worthwhile investment: but there might be better allocation of funds if you do not have: a tripod and head; or some macro flash gear; or the tripod mount ring for the lens; or focusing rails etc.

The Kenko tubes will allow a bit closer macro with the 100 and also can be used for several Close-Up variants on the 55 to 250 zoom and also the 18 to 55, usually at the FL range 30~55.

If you do buy the Kenko tubes, ensure you purchase the SECOND release of the DG Series SET of THREE Tubes.
This SET of THREE tubes will be identified with the WHITE SQUARE EF-S mount alignment mark on the FEMALE mount side, of EACH tube.

This is important, if you want your EF-S lenses to mount on the Kenko extension tubes

WW

[rbat]

The 100mm f/2.8 macro is also an amazing lens and can be used FF also. I absolutely adore it as it is very versatile and you can stand that bit further back from wildlife.
I'll be stalking your thread re landscape too as this is what I'm currently looking at.

[Tommo224]

I have the Tokina 11-16mm, and decided on it over any Tamron, Sigma and Canon equivalent based on price, aperture, and range.

I use it a lot along with my Sigma 30mm and Canon 50mm Macro.

I too want to buy another Macro lens, something a bit bigger though. So I've been considering a 60mm, 90mm and 100mm. But unsure which direction I want to go. From what I've read, the 60mm would be nice, but it's far too close to the 50mm I already have!

[Bennymiata]

The Tokina is a stunning wide angle lens and works well with filters too.
The colours, contrast and sharpness leave little to be desired.

If you are looking for a longer macro, the Canon 100L is excellent, but even better is the new Sigma 150mm Macro with OS.
The 150mm allows you to get more distance between you and the object, so you don't scare off insects so much, and you can do more things with extra lighting.

Just my 2c worth.

[gaze]

Tokina is great. I have had 12-24 for years and it is fantastic. I hear the 11-16 is even better optically, but its range is limited. Both are considerably cheaper than the Canon equivalent. Only downside I find with the Tokina is it has a tendancy to flare a bit in direct light, but most wide angles do.

[tw70]

Thanks for all your advice, i will do a bit more research and then put the one i want on my wish list for my husband

[Arg]

The Canon 10-22mm I own and is a no-regrets purchase wih excellent quality all round.

The Sigma 10-20mm is considerably cheaper to buy and quality is almost on par with Canon, so also a smart buy.

Bear in mid that Sigma lenses are only cheaper if you never sell your lenses, because Canon's have high resale value.

[Katt]

Another vote for the Canon 10-22mm. Although a little reluctant to pay the price initially, I am 100% glad that I did. The quality of the images is fantastic and I would recommend it to anyone looking for a wide angle.
Cheers,
Katt

[Keith Young]

I love my Tokina 11-16, its sharp and gives little problems. Yes the flare is terrible (or fantastic if you like that type of thing), just don't use it without the hood and try not to point it at the sun or similar. What I love about it is that it has that professional feel of build quality, the focus and zoom have that nice feel unlike the cheap (but not in price) plastic, consumer type lenses.