Wide Angle, 1.5x crop, photo. which?

RtC.

RtC.

Active member
So I have been shooting a while and am competent.I currently shoot on a 40D.17-85 f/4 IS70-200 f/4 IS300 f/5.6 IS50 f/1.4
So I now wish to go with a 10-17 / 10-22 Wide Angle/Fisheye.But this is where i come a bit unstuck.
Do I stick with tradition and go for the Canon 10-22, which isn't particularly sharp and not really the best lens for the money.
Sigma 10mm fish? Anyone used this?
Tokina 10-17mm fish? I don't want too much CA as post production is kept to a minimum.
Tamrons 10-17 option? not too clued up on Tamron, other than their glass is made by Nikon now?
Please don't say the 15mm fish from Canon, results with a 1.5x crop aren't pleasing.
Do you have any suggestions? I'm going to be using this for shooting skiing in the Winters and Landscapes with a little skate/BMX in the Summer. I'm not set on fisheye as it lacks some versatility and can give unpleasant architecture results.What would you suggest?
I know wheels and wax may be a better place for this but I thought I'd see what the gurus here have to say.
Any examples would be appreciated too.
 
i hear the tokina 10-17 is good, because its decently sharp and you can set it to 16 if your using a film body, but if you plan on sticking with the crop body then the sigma 10mm fish is your best option, but its expensive. as far as regular wide angles go the tamron isint to bad, i hear they have good optical quality
 
I'd say tokina because you can have fish at 10 and wide at 17. Maybe you could sell the 40d and get an old 5d or event the new one so you'd have full frame?
 
Yeah, I'm in the process of getting some money together for a full frame, s this wil be used on the 1.5 and then the full frame once I can justify one. Which should be soon. The problem is, I like buying new so I have to save a bit harder.It'll get there. But yes, the Tokina sounds like a good solution. Anyone else?
 
I shoot Nikon but everything I read when I was researching my old wide angle and comparing Sigma/Tamron and so on said that Canon's 10-22 beats everything else. The 10-17 gets some good writeups now though.

Or just get a 14mm prime or whatever Canon makes around that length.
 
I would definately go with sigma 10mm fish, ive used on my 40d and its super sharp and even with the 1.5 still great and if u ever get a 1d which i have also used it on....amazing as well...
 
I've got pretty similar gear to you and had a similar dilema. In the end, I went with the Sigma 10-20mm and it's served me pretty well. It's not too pricey and the quality's pretty decent. If you don't have a wide angle lens yet and you want to use your new lens for things other than skiing, I wouldn't go for a fish as you'll get sick of the effect after a while if that's your only wide angle option. Having said that, there is always the option to de-fish the shots in post but, if you don't like to do too much photoshop, I guess this won't really be an option and the edge quality will suffer. I've not used the Canon 10-22mm but I've heard good things and the max aperture's a bit bigger than the Sigma. Still, it seems like a lot of money to drop on a APS-C only lens if you're thinking of going full-frame soon.

It's worth noting that the Tokina can be used as a 180 degree diagonal fisheye on your 40D at 10mm or on a full-frame at 17mm. The Sigma 12-24mm is another one to look at. 12mm on a 1.6x crop is still pretty dam wide and it's also compatible with a full-frame body and 12mm on full-frame is reeeaaally wide!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top