Ultra wide angles

D

DaveKing

Messages
944
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi there, after using a Canon Powershot G11 (excellent camera BTW!) for a year I have decided to get a DSLR to compliment it for an upcoming trip to New Zealand (3 week tour of the South Island). My reason for wanting an SLR over the G11 was better low light photography and increased wide angle.

I have just bought a Canon 450D and Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 and I would like to add to it a ultra wide angle. Does anyone have any experience of ultra-wide angles? I was considering adding the Tamron 10-24mm as it appears to represent excellent value. How does it perform in comparison to the Canon, Tamron and Tokina lenses?

For interest, I will most be shooting mountains, reflective lakes and other landscapes in good light. I am also looking to add a tripod and remote release to my travel kit.

Thanks in advance for any opinions and information.
 
Before you buy, I would ask if you have tried one.

They are touted as perfect for landscapes although in reality 18mm is pretty wide in itself. It's possible to get drawn into the trap of getting as much in the frame as possible with a UWA but unless you think about the shot it can leave you with fairly uninspiring results.

I currently have a Tokina 12-24mm which is a fantastic lens - but I rarely go much wider than 16mm
 
I think that wide angle lenses are amongst the most useful. They can be used for "getting it all in" but that's just one of their uses as they can also be used for getting up close and creating interesting and artistic results. Plus if you have, for example, a 10-22mm (or there abouts) you'll almost certainly find that at the starting point of a standard zoom (lets say 17 or 18mm) the 10-20mm will suffer much less distortion and other nasties.

I think that before buying a wide angle it might be worth reading up on them first and possibly looking at some examples on the net. The dreaded but entertaining Ken Rockwell has something to say on the matter here...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

I have a Sigma 12-24mm, I love it and I use it often at 12mm.
 
I use a Tamron 10-24 pretty much daily for my work and find it ok. I wish I'd gone for a Sigma 10-20 sometimes as I've heard this suffers less from Barrel Distortion. If I was going to buy again for the price I'd probably opt for a second hand sigma than the Tamron.
 
Thanks for the responses.

No I haven't tried one, maybe I should hire one for a weekend and see how I go.

I read the Ken Rockwell site, and it was very informative. I think I should hire one before I go out and blow £300-400 on something that isnt right for me.

Cheers!
 
Hi Dave

I've the Sigma 10-20mm and am very pleased with it, for the limited use mine gets, it wasn't worth the extra money for the Canon 10-22mm. If you were going to hire one, prob hire the Canon lens.

If you look at my Flickr account below, these were all taken with the Sigma lens, all with natural light as well and I'm very pleased with the results.

Oh, and have a great time in New Zealand :clap:
 
If your feeling really adventurous, Sigma now have a 8-16mm f4.5-5.6

sigma_8-16mm_lens.JPG


although I think i'd go for the Tokina 11-16mm from the reviews i've read
 
In underwater photography ultra wides are king, and even top line pro's shun canon/nikons UWA's in favour of the tokina 10-17mm. Can't justify one myself at present for a dozen WA dives a year, but there must be something about it. Check out the threads on wetpixel.com if you're not sure
 
Second the fact that you should try before buy. For landscapes, I find even 24mm wide enough. For some landscapes, even 70mm on cropped works. 10mm is sometimes TOO wide. I find UWA really useful for exaggerated perspective shots more than landscapes.
 
Thanks for the great advice. I think I might hire one for a weekend and see what I make of the lens.
 
For "general landscape" (whatever that is...) I tend to use 24mm and 35mm focal lengths a lot (not by conscious decision - that's just what my shots end up being taken at with my zooms) on full frame.

Wider is good for specific applications where you've got a big foreground, or restricted space. It's also useful for faux-shift (keep camera level, crop off bottom half of the image) on buildings.
 
I went for the Tokina too. I've hired the 10-22mm several times and loved it, but the Tokina is sharper, and I need the f2.8 for shooting indoors in not great light. It's also the sharpest lens out of all UWAs.
 
How about hiring one for the three weeks instead? Saves the rush of trying to find one to buy if you do like it.
Then when you are back, you can decide whether you want to buy one, and do it at your leisure.
I got the 10-22 from Canon, after trying it for a while on a hire from lensesforhire
 
I did consider hiring one for the trip, but as I will be away for a total of 5 weeks I can't justify spending £200-250 when I could almost buy one for that! I am going to try and hire one over the xmas break and then see what I make of the ultra wide
 
The Canon 10-22 is fantastic, its the one lens I wish I could have kept when I moved to Nikon.

The Sigma 10-20 is meant to be almost as good, but definitely not as good.

I still think you should have stuck with the G11 actually, much more practical to travel with than a bag load of SLR.
 
I still have the G11 and I will be taking it with me for when I do hikes etc. As much as I am pleased with the G11 capabilities, the performance does really start to drop off in low light. ISO800 I consider the maximum. The G11 is still an excellent camera.

An SLR will offer a lot more flexibility at shooting compared to the G11. With an SLR I will be able to get more reach, take better portraits, and get wider.
 
For ultra-wide, top-quality, there are two candidates - Canon's 10-22 and Tokina's 11-16. You can get a second-hand Canon for £470 at MPB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top