Help me decide....

Steelo

Steelo

Messages
2,778
Name
Martin
Edit My Images
No
Ok, so I have around £400 to spend, maybe push to £450 max, and I think i'm looking for a wide angle lens, as I mainly do landscape....

I use a canon 450d

The lens of choice here is the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 EX DG

But

There's a niggling in my mind telling me to go for something better than the kit lens instead, and use as obviously a decent walk about lens, in a similar focal range...

The lens of choice here being the Tamron 17-50 non VC

So, what would you do?

As said, I mainly concentrate on landscape...
 
Hi Martin,

I guess you can shoot landscapes at any focal length. How are you finding the kit focal lengths at the moment?

The main issue is the perspective you could say. Some shots without a wide angle lens just cannot be made, yet on the otherhand the distant objects shot with a wide angle can be almost too small to see.

Ive read a common lens used to shoot landscapes is the 70-200 which I haven't used yet.

I am building my 3 main lenses around the 10-22 range, midrange zoom anywhere from 17-70mm and telezoom will be one of the 70-200mm.
 
Have you also considered the Canon 10-22mm? You may be able to pick one up within your budget, they're very highly regarded lenses with excellent image quality.

It's a limited focal range, then again in time you could have a multiple lens setup that caters for all decent focal lengths.

edit: Sorry missed out some of my post!
 
Last edited:
If your main interest is landscapes, then a superwide would seem the logical option unless you think 17mm is wide enough for your needs.

Don't rule out the tokina range, they're very underrated - just ask any underwater tog where superwides are the king of the sea!
 
Thanks for the replies so far guys...

I'm finding the kit lens 18-55mm just not wide enough.....I can get a lot in, but living in the Lake District, and spending a lot of time out and about within the Lakes, there is SO much to fit in, I feel at 18mm i'm missing "something" all of the time....

Would the extra 1mm on the 17-50 make much difference?

I did consider the Canon 10-22 but wasn't sure i'd get one within my budget, I shall take a look about now.

Tokina isn't a make i've even considered, so thanks for the suggestion, again, I shall take a look.
 
Steelo said:
I'm finding the kit lens 18-55mm just not wide enough.....I can get a lot in, but living in the Lake District, and spending a lot of time out and about within the Lakes, there is SO much to fit in, I feel at 18mm i'm missing "something" all of the time....
Click to expand...
Be VERY careful with that line of thought.

With a wide angle lens it's very tempting to try to "get it all in". But that gives rise to two hge problems.

Firstly all those impressive mountains start to look like little blobs on the horizon.

But secondly and more importantly you find yourself with a huge amount of foreground. So you have to put something - anything - in the foreground to fill the space. There's a whole school of landscape photography which I think should be called the put-a-rock-in-the-foreground-and-it-will-be-all-right school. You hear a lot of carp talked about "foreground interest". What this usually means is that the foreground has a rock or a cow pat or a clump of grass or something else you normally wouldn't waste 2 seconds looking at, and the REAL interest is shrunk to miniscule proportions in the background.

I'm not saying that ulta wide angles can't be used for good landscapes - of course they can - but it takes more skill than I have, and more skill than most people have.

So I say ... save your money.
 
the 10-20 could be a bit limeting unless thats your style,I would go for a wider range and better quality,I would also put price to one side and pick out the lens you want/needande buy that or save to buy it,if you have £450 now then with a bit of saving most lens are in reach.
 
dinners said:
Have you considered a Canon EF-S 15-85mm ?
Click to expand...

I was about to suggest this. Optically blows the socks off your kit lens, has 3mm extra at the wider end, which is a noticeable difference, and has that range and versatility to be a great walkabout lens. I'd strongly suggest this over a superwide.

On the other hand if its just IQ you want, had a look at the 17-40L?
 
Thanks again for the feedback.

So the general concensus maybe to replace the kit lens with something with great quality, opposed to going for a superwide....

Luke, I didn't realise I could find L glass within my budget, but that 17-40L seems like a great option, and L glass is something I would like to own, so that may have just became my number one choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top