I have a Canon 40D with a 24-105 L IS and a 100-400 L 4.6 4.5-5.6. I know there is a 1.6x mag factor so my 24 is really 38.4mm effective. Sometimes I would to get wider angles than this and feel somewhat limited. Would you all recommend a telephoto 10-24 say or a fixed lens and which one? And what is the difference between a wide angle and a fisheye lens.
Thanks all.
How wide of a lens do you want/need?
I have and highly recommend the 17-55 ef-s. It is an amazing all-purpose lens for a 1.6x sensor.
Fisheye lenses don't have the rectilinear correction in them. If you walk up towards a wall, your brain automatically processes that it's flat. However, a lens needs to make certain corrections so that a picture of a flat object appears flat (if perpendicular).
Many people love the EF-S 17-55. I don't like the fragility of its IS unit though. You could also consider the 17-40/4, the 16-35/2.8II, the EF-S 18-55 or 17-85 or 15-85, or the excellent EF-S 10-22.
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
I'd check out the sigma 8-16. Its the widest lens made for your camera.
www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10022011sigma8mm16mm.asp
In my opinion, the most important thing to do when you get a wide angle lens for a crop body is to get a lens designed for a crop body instead of one designed for full frame.
This is because with a full frame lens on a crop body, you'd be wasting most of your lens. Cost goes up and image quality goes down as lenses get wider. Thus if you get one that is wider than what you're using, you pay more and get lower IQ. (Thus this is only really important for wide lenses. I don't think it is a waste to buy medium to long EF lenses for crop bodies).
That said, the 14mm f/2.8 II would probably be pretty cool, even on a cropped body. But if I wanted to go that wide for a 40D, I'd still get an EF-S 10-22.
Also (obviously) if you're planning to get a full frame camera early in the life of the lens, things change.
And while the 10-22 is not known to be a fantastic lens for portraiture (mostly because of the distortion around the edges of the frame), it certainly is handy when space is an issue. Take this shot, for example, which I took last night using the 10-22...
If you're happy with the 24-105mm f/4L as a 'walkaround' (general purpose) lens, then I'd recommend the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5. If you want a wider angle and a faster aperture for indoor shots, then get the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8.
Anyone have this lens? Sounds like made afor APS-C cameras and should be all the width I would ever need. We will be doing a Danube river cruise this summer and wanted lots of panoramic views.
Another option is to just take along my wife's Canon SureShot as it has wider angles than my 40D with the 24mm lens.
Sorry, sigma 8-16
The Sigma 8-16mm was just announced 2 months ago, and is not available yet. Tough to tell if you will be able to get it by the summer.
Take a look at thisthread, it is about full frame wide angle lenses, but the Sigma 10-22 on a full frame camerawould give you similar angle of view to the mentioned 8-16 on an APS-C body. See if you like the angle and perspective.
I do recommend the Canon's 10-22. The sharpness, color and contrast are very good. If you use filters, the 10-22 will accept them, the 8-16 will not. Also by buying the 10-22, you will only have a 2mm gap between22 and 24mm.
It is always a good idea to rent the model you are interested in buying and play with it.
Take care
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote