what would you buy with $1000 smackeroos??

[canon-ball]

So i posted earlier asking about wide angle lenses, got some great feedback. the tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens is amazing from what ive found on it. my question is , with $1000 what wide angle lens would you go for? Is there something better than the tonkina that i havent found. I shoot on the canon eos rebel t2i, what do you guys think?

[crosbyharbison]

I go as wide as you can get with the new Sigma8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC


http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022011sigma8mm16mm.asp

[LoneSierra]

Well, I've got the canon 10-22. From what I've read it controls distortion and CA better than the other wide angle lenses. A little edge in the sharpness, too.


That 2.8 really is an attractive feature, though. Maybe I'm too nit picky about things, because I seem to always stick to Canon lenses, as opposed to 3rd parties. That's just me.

[canon-ball]

Yeah thats exactly what im looking for, this forum is great.


Thanks very much

[neuroanatomist]

Well, I've got the canon 10-22. From what I've read it controls distortion and CA better than the other wide angle lenses. A little edge in the sharpness, too.


That 2.8 really is an attractive feature, though. Maybe I'm too nit picky about things, because I seem to always stick to Canon lenses, as opposed to 3rd parties. That's just me.

Ditto for me. I debated the Canon 10-22mm vs. the Tokina 11-16mm, and was able to try them both out at a brick-and-mortar store. I did notice that 1 mm wider makes a difference, not huge, but you can tell the difference looking through the viewfinder. The constant f/2.8 of the Tokina is nice, but to get that they had to restrict the zoom range a lot, and frankly for landscape shots, you should be using a tripod, and shooting at a narrower aperture (f/8, f/11) for increased depth of field.


Canon-ball, another question for you - what lens(es) do you have currently? Just the 18-55mm kit lens? If so, you'll notice that the image quality of the 10-22mm is better than the kit lens - might get you looking at the EF-S 17-55mm.


But, if you're set on an UWA lens, I'd go with the Canon 10-22mm, and spend the balance of the $1K (or better yet, add a bit to that if you can) on a good tripod. I'd stay away from the cheap ones, Manfrotto is a good blend of quality and price. If you'll be hiking with your camera, you might want a carbon fiber model like the 190CXPRO3 or -4. If you aren't concerned about weight, consider the 055XPROB. With either, the 498RC2 makes a good head, with panorama capabilities. I really can't stress the need for a tripod enough - in your other post, you stated, "Ideally I want to in the future get images to canvas, big ones." No matter what lens you choose, if you want to print a landscape shot as a large print the only way you'll get a sharp enough image for that is to shoot from a stable tripod.

[Don Burkett]

I am extremely pleased with the Sigma 10-20mm f/4- f/5.6 and my wallet was happy too.