WTB Wide Zoom 10 - 22 or ?

Teddifish

I'm lusting after the 10 - 20 zoom, but can't decide for sure if 3.5 will be fast enough. Also I've only got about $500 I can spend on a new (used) lens.

Anyone have suggestions for either 3rd party lenses or a good Canon solution? I do a lot of low-light but I want to go wide. Feel free to talk me into a prime if you have a good one I can afford. Thanks.

cmason

Teddifish wrote:

I'm lusting after the 10 - 20 zoom, but can't decide for sure if 3.5 will be fast enough. Also I've only got about $500 I can spend on a new (used) lens.

Anyone have suggestions for either 3rd party lenses or a good Canon solution? I do a lot of low-light but I want to go wide. Feel free to talk me into a prime if you have a good one I can afford. Thanks.

Highly recommend the Sigma 10-22 EX HSM. Great lens...and don't have any issues with its f4-5.6, it is bright enough for the situations where I use it.

Sorry, won't sell you mine

Teddifish

cmason wrote:

Highly recommend the Sigma 10-22 EX HSM. Great lens...and don't have any issues with its f4-5.6, it is bright enough for the situations where I use it.

Sorry, won't sell you mine

Thanks. I'll go check it out. It looks great in your avatar. ;-)

rosselliot

I too recommend the 10-20 sigma. I own it and love it to death. I took a ton of pictures in France with outside and inside to the darkest cathedrals to museums galore. you'll be fine with it.

- RE

gus

I have a great 10-22..see this thread for how sharp it can be around the edges. 3.5 aint exactly a slow coach either.

Teddifish

gus wrote:

I have a great 10-22..see this thread for how sharp it can be around the edges. 3.5 aint exactly a slow coach either.

Those are amazing! Did you need a tripod to get them?

gus

Teddifish wrote:

Those are amazing! Did you need a tripod to get them?

Not for the busker but the others yes...i didnt like my ealier copy of that lens as i bought it quite early but if the one i have now is any indication of how they are coming out now then im sold. Look at the one of the casino..along the lines of the building at the edge of the photo & the letter R on the left...thats a sharp edge for a super wide.

Teddifish

gus wrote:

Not for the busker but the others yes...i didnt like my ealier copy of that lens as i bought it quite early but if the one i have now is any indication of how they are coming out now then im sold. Look at the one of the casino..along the lines of the building at the edge of the photo & the letter R on the left...thats a sharp edge for a super wide.

That's really impressive.

Can I ask what you use in low light when you don't have/want to use your tripod? I really like the width that this lens gives, and don't see any thing else that really compares . . . but I do a lot of shooting at dusk (because I love the light at sunset) and feel like I'll probably need an additional lens if I go that route.

The header picture on your home page is amazing, btw. Really wonderful.

gus

Teddifish wrote:

That's really impressive.

Can I ask what you use in low light when you don't have/want to use your tripod? I really like the width that this lens gives, and don't see any thing else that really compares . . . but I do a lot of shooting at dusk (because I love the light at sunset) and feel like I'll probably need an additional lens if I go that route.

The header picture on your home page is amazing, btw. Really wonderful.

I assume you mean 'what lens?"

No way would i ever do a sunset/sunrise shot without a tripod or someway of sitting the camera down 100% still. Those sort of shots are not about speed of lens & handheld (thats for bands)...sunsets/rises are about saturation & longer exposures. Give you photo a soul.

If you want to hand hold sunset shots you will kill yourself with disappointment.