Wide Angle Recommendation

RBrogen

I'm looking for recommendation for a really nice Canon L level piece of wide/super wide glass and I've heard about the 10-22 and 17-24 I think those numbers are right...any recommendations would be greatly appreciated?

Davidoff

RBrogen wrote:

I'm looking for recommendation for a really nice Canon L level piece of wide/super wide glass and I've heard about the 10-22 and 17-24 I think those numbers are right...any recommendations would be greatly appreciated?

For what camera and budget ?

RBrogen

Davidoff wrote:

For what camera and budget ?

Sorry David...lol ... been a rough week... I have new 5D and probably around 2k or so for $$

Davidoff

RBrogen wrote:

Sorry David...lol ... been a rough week... I have new 5D and probably around 2k or so for $$

No problem For full frame and 2k budget, I'd say the 17-40L or if you need 2.8, the 16-35. I think those are the usual choices. Both considerably under 2k.

RBrogen

Davidoff wrote:

No problem For full frame and 2k budget, I'd say the 17-40L or if you need 2.8, the 16-35. I think those are the usual choices.

Terrific David. Thank you for the recommendations. I was just about to hit buy on newegg.com for the 16-35. I'm a glass nut now

Davidoff

No problem, you're welcome. Maybe you'll want to check out the 14mm prime as well. Don't forget to post some pictures when you get whatever you get !

NeilL

Davidoff wrote:

No problem, you're welcome. Maybe you'll want to check out the 14mm prime as well. Don't forget to post some pictures when you get whatever you get !

David, do you (anyone?) have any hands-on experience, or thoughts, about the 14mm prime?

Thanks.
Neil

Davidoff

NeilL wrote:

David, do you (anyone?) have any hands-on experience, or thoughts, about the 14mm prime?

Thanks.
Neil

I don't have first hand experience, but I've read good things about it, on forums and reviews such as this one : http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-14mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

claudermilk

A couple of things to point out. One, the 10-22 is not an L lens, not that it makes a whole lot of difference. But don't get hung up on the "L" too much. Two, the 10-22 is an EF-S lens, which means it cannot be mounted on the 5D. Keep this in mind when looking for lenses in the future--if you see it noted as an EF-S not an EF, just ignore it. By the same token, look carefully at the third-party lens designations as they have crop-only lenses as well (I am certain Tamron's DI-II is for crop only and it appears Sigma DC, and Tokina DX are as well).

The 10-22 is effectively replicating the 16-35 FF FOV for a crop camera, so that would be the equivalent. It also has a better reputation than the 17-40, but is more expensive.

RBrogen

claudermilk wrote:

A couple of things to point out. One, the 10-22 is not an L lens, not that it makes a whole lot of difference. But don't get hung up on the "L" too much. Two, the 10-22 is an EF-S lens, which means it cannot be mounted on the 5D. Keep this in mind when looking for lenses in the future--if you see it noted as an EF-S not an EF, just ignore it. By the same token, look carefully at the third-party lens designations as they have crop-only lenses as well (I am certain Tamron's DI-II is for crop only and it appears Sigma DC, and Tokina DX are as well).

The 10-22 is effectively replicating the 16-35 FF FOV for a crop camera, so that would be the equivalent. It also has a better reputation than the 17-40, but is more expensive.

Thanks for the feedback...yes I was actually looking at the 10-22 as an option for my Rebel XTi because it won't fit my 5D. I had read as well that the glass in the 10-22 is actually "L" quality glass but Canon chose not to mark that particular lens with the "L" for some reason. I just bought the Canon 100mm Macro and I want to add a Wide and a Telephoto L Series (100-400) to my arsenal which I think will give me a good selection to choose from.

NeilL

Davidoff wrote:

I don't have first hand experience, but I've read good things about it, on forums and reviews such as this one : http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-14mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Many thanks, I'll have a read of that!

Neil

20DNoob

I just picked up the 17-40 and really digging it on my crops(now all I needs a FF), so far I've just played around with it. I was thinking of a 16-35 but after reading a bunch of reviews stating aside from the 2.8 IQ is about the same. So unless your needing 2.8 you might save heaps of loot going for the 17-40.

I've also read elsewhere the Canadian rebates will be starting tomorrow with the US ones following within a week or two.

http://www.photoprice.ca/rebates/

And I just got my 17-40 the other day.:cry

KED

claudermilk wrote:

A couple of things to point out. One, the 10-22 is not an L lens, not that it makes a whole lot of difference. But don't get hung up on the "L" too much. Two, the 10-22 is an EF-S lens, which means it cannot be mounted on the 5D. Keep this in mind when looking for lenses in the future--if you see it noted as an EF-S not an EF, just ignore it. By the same token, look carefully at the third-party lens designations as they have crop-only lenses as well (I am certain Tamron's DI-II is for crop only and it appears Sigma DC, and Tokina DX are as well).

The 10-22 is effectively replicating the 16-35 FF FOV for a crop camera, so that would be the equivalent. It also has a better reputation than the 17-40, but is more expensive.

Please pardon my entry-level knowledge on this type of issue, but for a 1.3x body (Mk III or II N), 10-22 EF S or 16 - 35 II L (forgetting the >2x cost differential)? I have zero familiarity with the "S" designation.

ziggy53

KED wrote:

Please pardon my entry-level knowledge on this type of issue, but for a 1.3x body (Mk III or II N), 10-22 EF S or 16 - 35 II L (forgetting the >2x cost differential)? I have zero familiarity with the "S" designation.

The Canon 1D and 1Ds body series only accept Canon EF series lenses, not the EF-S. (The "S" designates "short back focus" and the mirror of the 1D will likely strike the rear of lens, causing probable damage to the mirror and/or lens.)

The Canon EF 16-35mm, f2.8L II and EF 17-40mm, f4 work fine.

I can also mount a Sigma 10-20mm, f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM on my 1D MKII and get a very strong vignetting but almost usable 8x10 crop. I don't recommend it but the FOV is astonishing.

KED

ziggy53 wrote:

The Canon 1D and 1Ds body series only accept Canon EF series lenses, not the EF-S. (The "S" designates "short back focus" and the mirror of the 1D will likely strike the rear of lens, causing probable damage to the mirror and/or lens.)

The Canon EF 16-35mm, f2.8L II and EF 17-40mm, f4 work fine.

I can also mount a Sigma 10-20mm, f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM on my 1D MKII and get a very strong vignetting but almost usable 8x10 crop. I don't recommend it but the FOV is astonishing.

I'm still trying to learn to be a good photographer (which no doubt at some point gets to the mechanical aspects, but not yet for me; I have much to learn), but it's just astounding to me that your Canon lens could cause damage to your Canon body.

ziggy53

KED wrote:

I'm still trying to learn to be a good photographer (which no doubt at some point gets to the mechanical aspects, but not yet for me; I have much to learn), but it's just astounding to me that your Canon lens could cause damage to your Canon body.

Canon did design the EF-S lenses so that they will not mount on a 5D, 1D or 1Ds type body (without modification.)

claudermilk

What ziggy said. Just ignore the EF-S and concentrate on EF lenses for the 1D cameras.