Need help on wide Canon lens?

wasigan

Hello,
I'm new here (having spent the past year or so in the Customization forum working on my site), and I need advice on my next lens.

Last year, I splurged on a 100mm 2.8 macro lens and I love it - it's great for the macro work I do and also for portraits. But now I'm looking for advice for Santa on which new lens to get me! I do alot of traveling and am looking for the best lens that Santa can afford, and a lens that’s very good for landscapes, but also good street portraits too (this is important).

I'm looking at the Canon 24mm prime (which I believe translates to about a 38mm) or the 10-22mm 2.8 zoom. I rented the 17-55mm last year for a trip to Peru and it was nice, but I wasn't blown away by the results, though the IS was nice. I guess I'd like a bit more drama in the landscapes images. I realize the 10-22mm might distort close-up street portraits, but could I get away with it?

I'm still learning about how the crop factor translates on my Rebel XTi and how focal lengths are a bit different on a 1.6 crop. I also know this subject of lenses has been debated here a lot, so I really appreciate your indulgence here again. But if you had to pick one, can you offer pros/cons on what you think is the BEST overall wider lens (maybe not ultra wide) for more dramatic landscapes, street scenes/portraits, and an overall sharp lens?

thanks

LKN Dave

10-22mm
I took the 10-22mm lens to the Grand Canyon last year for my Rebel XT and loved it. It was a well built lens and I would own one now if I didn't but a 5d.

craig_d

Yes, 24mm on a 1.6x crop-frame camera gives a field of view approximately equivalent to 38mm on full-frame. You just multiply by the crop factor. A crop-frame camera simply has a smaller sensor, so the effect is the same as taking a full-frame picture and cropping off all four sides.

I wouldn't use an ultra-wide lens like the EF-S 10-22mm for street portraits. Everyone will be either very small and far away in the image, or distorted, except at the short end (22mm x 1.6 = approximately 35mm). For street photography I would suggest either a prime in the 24-35mm range, or a standard zoom. Canon has good, fast 24mm and 35mm primes, but the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM is a dog -- serious problems with flare and purple fringing. For zooms, the EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM and EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM are both very good; for street photography, I'd say the difference in zoom range isn't that crucial, so the choice would come down to whether you prefer f/2.8 or IS.

Another thing to consider is that street photography benefits from an inconspicuous camera. A big zoom calls attention to itself in a way that a compact prime doesn't. For that matter, I've been thinking of getting a completely different camera for street work, because a high-quality compact like the new Panasonic GF1 or Olympus E-P1 with a pancake lens mounted on it is much less conspicuous than any DSLR.

How wide you need for landscapes is up to you. On a 1.6x crop camera, I've used Tokina's 12-24mm f/4 lens, which gave good results and isn't too expensive. The EF-S 10-22mm is probably a bit better, though, from what I've read about it.

So, to sum up, I don't think the same lens will do great wide-angle landscapes and great street photography. The best compromise is probably the new Canon EF-S 15-85 f/3.5-5.6, which seems to have very good IQ according to the reviews I've seen, or the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, which you apparently weren't satisfied with. But I think two lenses is the way to go here.

dmmattix

My favorite lens never gets any love on this forum. The 17-40F4L is a very nice lens. Not to big. FOV for 17mm side is about 27mm and goes out to around 65mm FOV on the long end. Really pretty nice range. The color is very good. Resolution is very good and it is a L lens. Compares very favorably with the $1500 16-35F2.8L. You lose a stop but depending upon what you shoot that will only matter occasionally.

You can find one used in the $500 range new from B&H is $700

Just another idea that rarely gets any play around here...

Mike

craig_d

I have the EF 17-40mm f/4L USM too, and it is a very nice lens. If the OP is comfortable with 17mm as his widest focal length for landscapes (27.2mm FF equivalent) and a max aperture of f/4, then it could be an excellent choice. Personally, I'd want both a faster aperture than that for street work, and a wider focal length than that for landscape, which is why I recommended two lenses. But you're right that the 17-40mm should be considered.

wasigan

Yes......
That's exactly what I'm thinking, craig_d. I think I need to go with two separate lenses. Thanks to you, dmmattix and LKNDave for the feedback.

When I said street photography, I really meant street portraits - close-ups of folks I meet on the street and around when I'm traveling, and while I could have that with the 24-70 or 24-105, I'd rather have the wider lens for landscapes.

Now I just need to sweet talk Santa! Thanks again,

Lori