Hello everyone,
Hope you can help. I have a canon 450d with the bog standard 18-55mm IS lens. I really enjoy landscape (mostly waterfalls) and sports photography and am going to get the 70-200mm F4 L lens. As a beginner i
Printable View
Hello everyone,
Hope you can help. I have a canon 450d with the bog standard 18-55mm IS lens. I really enjoy landscape (mostly waterfalls) and sports photography and am going to get the 70-200mm F4 L lens. As a beginner i
I know you are mostly asking about landscape pics/lenses, but just because you didn
Any lens can be used for landscape photos (well, almost any lens - maybe not the MP-E 65mm). Telephoto lenses are used to isolate elements or compress the scene (the appearance of the background and foreground being close together). Standard lenses give a 'normal' viewpoint. But probably the most commonly used type of lens for scenic landscapes are wide or ultra-wide angle lenses. With your 450D and its 1.6x FOVCF, your 18mm lens is the equivalent of 29mm on full frame - not that wide. There are are a few of options for ultrawide lenses on 1.6x - the Canon EF-S 10-22mm, Tokina 11-16mm, and some offerings from Sigma. Of them, I've used only the Canon 10-22mm, and it's really an excellent and fun lens.
Just an added note to neuroanatomist about the ultra wide angle lens for 1.6x FOVCF.
I had the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and I loved it! It was great for landscape and architecture.
I tried expanding my use of the lens to portraits with a twist. Different perspectives and angles not achievable from standard focal lengths.
But I realized that the Tokina has a pretty strong distortion at 11mm. From what I can tell and from the reviews from this site, the Canon 10-22mm has less distortion and despite the increase in price, definitely worth it in the long run.
But at the same time, I had to get rid of this lens since it wasn't usable in many situations.
I got the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 & Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L in it's place.
I wouldn't recommend the wide angle as a second lens....maybe a third.
Possibly stick with the 18mm for your landscapes, and like you said get the 70-200mm range for your sports [:)]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakahiroW4047
The EF-S 10-22mm does very well in the distortion department - there is barrel distortion present, but it's relatively minor (and can often be worked around with composition). In the example onthe left (at 10mm) you can see a bit of distortion in the leaves at the upper left. In the example on the right (at 13mm) it's more evident because of the placement of the fountain.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4152/...bf595457af.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4152/...1ab11ea0c1.jpg
EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM @ 10mm, 0.6 s, f/14, ISO 100 EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM @ 13mm, 1/500 s, f/8, ISO 100
The performance of the EF-S 10-22mm on distortion is actually substantially better than the FF UWA zoom lenses (16-35mm f/2.8L II, 17-40mm f/4L) - so much better than even when those L lenses are used on a 1.6x crop body in the 'sweet spot' of the lenses, the 10-22mm still shows less distortion!