Options

Which wide angle to get...

GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
edited May 19, 2010 in Cameras
Ok, as much as I'd like to make the 70-200 f2.8 L my next glass purchase, the coffers just aren't gonna be full enough to pull that one off for a little bit. So, the next lens I need is a wide angle lens. Considering the Canon and Tokina. Should I also consider the Sigma? Should I be concerned about the Canon not being as fast as the Tokina (even though it has more range)? I will be shooting weddings some but mostly using this for outdoors stuff, some landscape and portrait work mostly. May also venture into real estate photography and would use it for that as well.

I'm not afraid of using a flash but I know it's not always practical which is why I'm asking whether I should go for the faster glass.

Thanks.
Website
Facebook Fan Page
Blog

Comments

  • Options
    time2smiletime2smile Registered Users Posts: 835 Major grins
    edited May 16, 2010
    I just got a deal on the Tokina 12-24 F4, and I'm not looking back, its sharp at F4 and its wide on my cropped Nikon D90. I can just imagine how good the newer faster lenes are these days. All the main manufacturers seem to be in great competition for a market share in this range.
    High ISO bodies are causing lens manufacturers to slow the lenses down, this makes the lenes smaller of course. if it matters stay with the fastest glass you can get, in the long run you woun't regret it. Don't plan on portraits, to wide and close makes people not very flattering, wait for the 70-200 for that.

    Good Luck and go wide.....
    Ted....
    It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
    Nikon
    http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 16, 2010
    time2smile wrote: »
    I just got a deal on the Tokina 12-24 F4, and I'm not looking back, its sharp at F4 and its wide on my cropped Nikon D90. I can just imagine how good the newer faster lenes are these days. All the main manufacturers seem to be in great competition for a market share in this range.
    High ISO bodies are causing lens manufacturers to slow the lenses down, this makes the lenes smaller of course. if it matters stay with the fastest glass you can get, in the long run you woun't regret it. Don't plan on portraits, to wide and close makes people not very flattering, wait for the 70-200 for that.

    Good Luck and go wide.....

    Thanks. I just have to decide on whether I want to go fast or not. I tend to prefer the faster lenses, not as much for the low light but for the creativeness. But I guess you don't do that with a wide angle anyway. Hmm...
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
  • Options
    ZanottiZanotti Registered Users Posts: 1,411 Major grins
    edited May 16, 2010
    I have been very happy with the Sigma one - but I am not really an often wide angle shooter.

    Here are a couple indoor shots:

    12mm:

    261425224_rwYzs-L.jpg



    14mm:

    261425296_gnX3m-L.jpg


    10mm (starts to get really distorted):

    261425890_akCAu-M.jpg

    Good luck,

    Z
    It is the purpose of life that each of us strives to become actually what he is potentially. We should be obsessed with stretching towards that goal through the world we inhabit.
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 16, 2010
    Looks good. Honestly, I don't plan to do a LOT of wide angle shooting but, when I need it I NEED it.

    Another question: I know the I'll be able to correct the Canon distortion with PT Lens. I wonder if the Tonkina and Sigma lenses are in there. Also, LR will offer lens correction in LR 3 when it ships. I wonder if they'll build profiles for the Sigma and Tokina lenses...
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 17, 2010
    Anyone else?
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
  • Options
    FLYING EYEBALLFLYING EYEBALL Registered Users Posts: 183 Major grins
    edited May 18, 2010
    I recently picked up a second hand Tokina 12-24 F4 and I'm really liking it.

    870826619_CEHj6-L-1.jpg

    869481005_zMggv-L.jpg

    Still saving pennies for a 70-200 2.8 iloveyou.gif
    http://jskustoms.smugmug.com/
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 18, 2010
    I've seen the 12-24 around. Seems like people like it. Just wondering if I need a faster lens.
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
  • Options
    FLYING EYEBALLFLYING EYEBALL Registered Users Posts: 183 Major grins
    edited May 18, 2010
    GadgetRick wrote: »
    I've seen the 12-24 around. Seems like people like it. Just wondering if I need a faster lens.

    What types of things do you shoot?

    They have a pretty good reviews section over at Fred Miranda.

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/
    http://jskustoms.smugmug.com/
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    FLYING EYEBALL wrote: »
    What types of things do you shoot?

    They have a pretty good reviews section over at Fred Miranda.

    http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

    I will be shooting weddings some but mostly using this for outdoors stuff, some landscape and portrait work mostly. May also venture into real estate photography and would use it for that as well.

    I'm not looking for reviews. I have read the reviews. My question is whether I should be concerned with getting faster glass or is f4 enough. I realize for landscape photography, I'll be using a tripod so that's not an issue. For wedding shots (inside possible) it will be an issue. It's one of those things where I won't be doing a TON of weddings but, when I need it, I'll REALLY need it (faster glass).
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
  • Options
    time2smiletime2smile Registered Users Posts: 835 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    I like the Tokina 12-24 f4, but i havent done a wedding or special event with it, did some prom pics but that was outdoors. The glass is fast and sharp. I think if you post a question in the wedding section on the two lenses tokina 11-16 f2.8 and the 12-24 f4, you may get the answers you are looking for. I hear some of those dark churches can really require a f2.8 or even faster. Now thats opens a new question for you, if f2.8 doesnt fit the bill, do they go for a fast prime f1.8 or better for those dark shots.

    I would go and try several different lenses, get happy with one and then rent it for a week, just to be sure, I paid just over $300 for my used one, like new from evilbay. I felt it was a good deal for me, i wasnt looking for anything special and the 12-24 complimented my line up.

    Personally, I would be looking more into the 11-16 f2.8, not just because its faster, but cause of the reviews and lack of distortion that everyone seems to rave about...

    keep us posted....
    Ted....
    It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
    Nikon
    http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,887 moderator
    edited May 19, 2010
    GadgetRick wrote: »
    ... My question is whether I should be concerned with getting faster glass or is f4 enough. I realize for landscape photography, I'll be using a tripod so that's not an issue. For wedding shots (inside possible) it will be an issue. It's one of those things where I won't be doing a TON of weddings but, when I need it, I'll REALLY need it (faster glass).

    I don't think that a super-wide-angle lens is all that significant at a wedding. You lose any sort of intimacy with the subjects.

    I use, and most folks that I know who shoot weddings use, standard zooms and telephoto zooms for both the ceremony and the reception. Occasionally I'll also use a fast prime for the ceremony if flash is not allowed (which is typical where I live), but typically I appreciate the flexibility of an f2.8 zoom.

    When I do use the Sigma 10-20mm, f4-f5.6 EX DC HSM (crop camera) or Canon 17-40mm, f4L USM (FF camera) it's for an establish shot, like an overview of the entire church, or for cramped quarters, like the bride getting ready. In either case it would be more of a "spice" lens as opposed to a "bread and butter" lens that I use all the time.

    I suggest that you rent a super-wide zoom and use that rental period to determine the importance of aperture.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    I have the Canon 10-22 lens and love it :D
    Mary
    www.Dogdotsphotography.com
  • Options
    BigAlBigAl Registered Users Posts: 2,294 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    I agree with Ziggy - a really wide angle lens won't be much use at weddings other than for special effects.

    Here, my missus in the bg, less than 2m from her sister. Both are roughly the same height (Sigma 10-20 at 10mm)

    274594968_WsAkx-M.jpg

    (oh yes - and we spotted a lion in the grass, less than 100m from us, after we'd taken the pics mwink.gif)
    Birds
    Bugs
    Spiders
    Flowers
  • Options
    GadgetRickGadgetRick Registered Users Posts: 787 Major grins
    edited May 19, 2010
    Ok, I am just starting to shoot (as a 2nd) weddings so I kinda thought a wide angle will only be useful every so often. So I guess I'll be using it for the other things. I can use a tripod for these other things so I guess a larger aperture isn't going to be needed so much.

    I've been leaning towards the Canon, the f4 is what made me stop and think. I'm planning on renting one to try it out. Any reasons I should get one of the others over the Canon (besides a larger aperture)?

    Thanks a bunch guys!
    Website
    Facebook Fan Page
    Blog
Sign In or Register to comment.