13802394:grantwhitty said:When I had my 7D Mk II I just used a 16-35 2.8 L II, worked fine for me, not super wide though, but it was enough for me. I used a Canon 10-24 before. Here's an example at 16mm.
http://www.grantwhitty.com/Photographs/Ski-1/Dew-Tour/i-4BzNpDX/A
13802454:finnolydorb said:tokina is definitely better than both those
13802459:eheath said:Meh, the canon 16-35 is a superb lens, just vert expensive and built for full frame.
Tokina has a 11-20 now. No idea how good it is, but the 11-16 is the best because of the f2.8, fast and wide. The 12-24 gets alot of hype these days, as does the sigma 18-35 1.8
13802694:Sklar said:I have a 17-40 and 15 fish right now, so I definitely want to go wider than the 18-35, although it does look nice.
I think I'll probably sell the 17-40 and 15 fish (RIP), and pick up an 11-16 and 35.
13802722:eheath said:Buy yourself a new fish, they're cheap as hell.
13802725:Sklar said:all the cheap crop fisheyes are so bad though
13802725:Sklar said:all the cheap crop fisheyes are so bad though
13804682:erikK said:I disagree
![]()
13804725:Sklar said:Canon