Canon wide angle lens choice?

Dinozorr

Dinozorr

Messages
77
Name
Jason
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello all,
I'm looking for some advice on a canon wide angle lens buy.
I'm looking for a wide angle L lens for wide angle milkyway and star photography and also normal daytime wide angle photography in general.
I want to stick to canon lenses to be honest so I don't mind forking out the £s!
I'm looking at either the 14mm f2.8 11. Or the 16-35mm f2.8.
Could someone ease give me their experiences and thoughts . Thank you.
 
I would pay serious consideration to the Canon 16-35 F4 L IS, a lot of reports and reviews suggest its better thank the 16-35 F2.8 V2. I own one and its fantastic and tack sharp across the image.
 
I went with the Tamron 15-30mm F/2.8 DI VC USM, 2.8 and image stabilisation were the decision makers for me.
 
For astro the 14mm f2.8 would be the best. However, for the other stuff the 16-35 would be more versatile. As for f4 vs f2.8 - for astro stuff f2.8 wipes the floor with f4. The same length exposure will grab twice as much light, which means about 2.5 times as many stars - enough to make quite a difference.
 
If it has to be one lens, I guess the 16-35 f2.8 II. Personally I've got the 16-35 f4 and had the Samyang 14mm f2.8. Mrs HJ also has the same, and has just bought the Samyang 24mm f 1.4 specifically for astro.
 
You don't mention what camera you'll be using, i.e. crop or full frame. Be aware that the lenses mentioned above won't be that wide on a crop.

Assuming full frame then I'd recommend the 16-35 f/4L IS. It's a better lens than the f/2.8L II, although one stop slower and I don't think you really need that stop for the uses you mention.
 
Hi folks. Sorry I didn't mention the camera. It's a 5dmk3.
Some interesting thoughts coming forward.
I have always been of the opinion that f2.8 or wider would be best for astro but some Of you have mentioned f4 especially in the 16-35mm? Does this not go against the rule of thumb?
I also thought the 16-35 f2.8 11 was supposed to be a dead sharp lens?
 
Last edited:
When I've done astro stuff in the past I've used the Samyang 14mm because it was cheap to buy and highly recommended for the task. I sold it on as I wasn't getting much use out of it, but with a trip to Iceland planned next year, I may get another, or more likely get the Samyang 24mm f1.4. In terms of the 16-35, I had a choice between the f2.8II and f4 and went for the latter because of the rave reviews (better than the 2.8) and lower cost. I'v not been disappointed, and it's my standard 'walkabout' lens for landscapes. I view astro as a specialist area, so I'm happy to have a dedicated lens for the job. If this doesn't appeal or isn't an option, then I can see why the 16-35 f2.8II might be the best choice for you. It's worth noting that there's a mk III just around the corner: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=28371.0 but whether that's four months or nine months away is hard to say.
 
Vertigo1 said:
You don't mention what camera you'll be using, i.e. crop or full frame. Be aware that the lenses mentioned above won't be that wide on a crop.

Assuming full frame then I'd recommend the 16-35 f/4L IS. It's a better lens than the f/2.8L II, although one stop slower and I don't think you really need that stop for the uses you mention.
Click to expand...
For astro, an f/2.8 (or ideally, faster) is advantageous.
 
Dinozorr said:
Hi folks. Sorry I didn't mention the camera. It's a 5dmk3.
Some interesting thoughts coming forward.
I have always been of the opinion that f2.8 or wider would be best for astro but some Of you have mentioned f4 especially in the 16-35mm? Does this not go against the rule of thumb?
I also thought the 16-35 f2.8 11 was supposed to be a dead sharp lens?
Click to expand...
Yes, you want f/2.8 lenses or faster ideally. I didn't think the extra stop would make much difference, but it does.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Assuming full frame then I'd recommend the 16-35 f/4L IS. It's a better lens than the f/2.8L II, although one stop slower and I don't think you really need that stop for the uses you mention.
Click to expand...

For astro stuff aperture is king. Most of the time when shooting wide-angle astro the limiting factor is the exposure time - too long and you start getting star trails. With the same exposure time (and same ISO) an f2.8 lens will grab twice as much light as will an f4 lens. That translates to about 2.5 times more stars, which will make a huge difference to the final image.
 
I've been having a dabble at astro with a 16-35 F4 and been reasonably happy with it. I'm much more of a limiting factor than the lens is.
I guess it depends on how much of it you're going to do. For non astro stuff the F4 is really good.
My attempt at a star trail from Sunday night with it are on Flicker as is some other night shots taken at the same time ( not posted it in astro as feel a bit of a pretender after seeing Swag's nebula shot).
My go at the milky way with it is here https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/another-milky-way.607552/
Aperture may be king in astro but a sharper lens wide open is surely better? Then there is the high iso performance of new bodies...
 
Last edited:
Wayne Els said:
I've been having a dabble at astro with a 16-35 F4 and been reasonably happy with it. I'm much more of a limiting factor than the lens is.
I guess it depends on how much of it you're going to do. For non astro stuff the F4 is really good.
My attempt at a star trail from Sunday night with it are on Flicker as is some other night shots taken at the same time ( not posted it in astro as feel a bit of a pretender after seeing Swag's nebula shot).
My go at the milky way with it is here https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/another-milky-way.607552/
>>>Aperture may be king in astro but a sharper lens wide open is surely better? Then there is the high iso performance of new bodies...<<<
Click to expand...

There are plenty of sharp f/2.8 uwa's out there when shot wide open though, so that's a bit of a moot point, the £300 Samyang 14mm being one of them, so you don't even need to spend loads. High ISO ability of course is always good, but it still should be tethered with a fast lens IMO otherwise you will get the limits of your kit very quickly when shooting Astro (not that I'm any kind of expert mind!)
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
There are plenty of sharp f/2.8 uwa's out there when shot wide open though, so that's a bit of a moot point, the £300 Samyang 14mm being one of them, so you don't even need to spend loads.
Click to expand...

Fair point, my comment was really aimed at the different flavours of 16-35 available.

I think it really depends on how much use you will get from the lens outside of this niche. For me the zoom with it's ability to take a normal filter and IS is a much more usable day to day lens than the 14mm. Lots cheaper too. The Samyang (not in the OP's list) is a lot cheaper but the same normal use comments apply then there is also it's distortion (correctable) and only manual focus.
 
Wayne Els said:
Fair point, my comment was really aimed at the different flavours of 16-35 available.

I think it really depends on how much use you will get from the lens outside of this niche. For me the zoom with it's ability to take a normal filter and IS is a much more usable day to day lens than the 14mm. Lots cheaper too. The Samyang (not in the OP's list) is a lot cheaper but the same normal use comments apply then there is also it's distortion (correctable) and only manual focus.
Click to expand...
All true, but with Astro you're pretty much always going to be shooting infinity anyway. As you say, it depends how much use it'll get, but if you do buy the Samyang it's so inexpensive you can almost justify only using it now and again! That would be a shame though as its a great lens, very sharp and great fun especially on FF :)
 
odd jim said:
All true, but with Astro you're pretty much always going to be shooting infinity anyway. As you say, it depends how much use it'll get, but if you do buy the Samyang it's so inexpensive you can almost justify only using it now and again! That would be a shame though as its a great lens, very sharp and great fun especially on FF :)
Click to expand...

I nearly impulse bought one in St Ives last year. I've had 2 attempts at the milky way with different lenses and surprisingly in both cases infinity wasn't the sharpest setting. For the sharpest focus on a star I needed to go into live view and zoom electronically and tweak the focus ring. Then come out of live view and take the shot.
 
Yeah that's pretty much what I do, also focus scales can't always be relied on!
 
For my 5D mk3 I use a Samyung 14mm f2.8, fully manula focus for under £300. I'd love to have the Canon 14mm but can't quite justify the cost currently.
 
Another Samyang 14mm f/2.8 user here (f/frame).
Very happy with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top