Which wide angle lens for my Canon 40d?

[Deano]

Im after a wide angle lens to go with my 40D for doing landscape shots etc.. any recommendations?

 

[condyk]

depends on budget and what you have already, if anything. But a great buy is the 17-40mm 4.0 L, or cheaper the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, or cheaper the Sigma 17-70. all will do 'landscape' and at good quality.

 

[marky_h]

Sigma 10-20mm? Everyone has/has had one at sometime, it seems . Sigma 12-24mm is also a possibility, as is the Canon EF-S 10-22mm.

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Maybe not as wide as you'd like but I've had excellent results from a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 prime, around the £199.99 to £249.99 region and is uber sharp!
You can even do some very interesting portraiture with it too!

 

[n30_mkii]

Can't go wrong with the sigma 10-20mm, most people fav lens, and a real bargain

 

[percymon]

Another vote for Sigma 10-20mm - equivalent to 16-32 on the 40d

 

[robbys82]

sigma 10-20

 

[superstat]

Sigma 10-20...

 

[foodpoison]

I love my 10-20mm! Shes a beauty
Have produced some fantastic shots with it. Perfect for both landscape and tonnes more.

Theres also the Canon 10-22mm which is apparently better, but its also more expensive.

Heard excellent things about the Canon 17-40, but its also a lot more expensive.
Canon 17-55 IS is apparently fantastic, too.

 

[MKD]

A really very good lens used it on my 400D for just over a year and got some great shots (just in the process of selling it) would not have let go except just got a 16-35 L & 5D.

 

[Impartial-Witness]

Tokina 12-24 is a much better lens than the sigma 10-20 IMHO better build better image quality and constant f4

 

[condyk]

Having owned both I wouldn't say the Toki is 'much better' at all. Both are great performers and other than the more noticiable CA on the Toki I doubt most would see a difference. Lack of USM/HSM AF is a downer on the Toki, alongside the plus points you mention.

 

[StewartR]

I'm going to offer a dissenting voice. I have the Canon EF-S 10-22 and I absolutely love it, so you'd think I'd be with those people recommending an ultra-wide - but I don't think they're really right for landscapes. It's a bit too wide. I find it difficult to make use of the huge vertical angle of view without having an awfully contrived composition.

I love a wide horizontal angle of view, but for that I typically use a focal length of around 20-40mm and stitch several frames together. (See my SmugMug gallery.)

For a landscape lens I'd be looking for something in the 17-50 range or thereabouts. For example;
* Canon 16-35 f/2.8 L
* Canon 17-70 f/4 L
* Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
* Canon 17-55 f/2.8 L IS
* Sigma 17-70

Of all these I'd go for the 17-55 because the combination of wide angle, fast aperture and IS gives it a unique ability to work in poor light - it's great for indoor stuff as well as landscapes.

 

[desantnik]

The EFS10-22 is a cracking bit of kit, a fair bit more expensive than the non-Canon's but it is really good.

On the other hand, one of its plus points vs the others is how wide it goes, but I'm not sure you'd want that for landscapes. It does give some crazy almost fish eye type effects at the widest end, which I love for motorsport static shots, but it might not be everyone's cup of tea to see landscapes warped!

 

[Impartial-Witness]

Having owned both I wouldn't say the Toki is 'much better' at all. Both are great performers and other than the more noticiable CA on the Toki I doubt most would see a difference. Lack of USM/HSM AF is a downer on the Toki, alongside the plus points you mention.

OK, you make a fair point, I may have been biased having tried the sigma 10-20 but not actually owned one. but the tokina is sharper, and although it does not have USM/HSM focusing speeds it is not slow to focus, but that should not really matter for landscapes, also my d300 fixes the CAS problem which might be very off putting to other users.