Ultra Wide lens choices for APS-C

[RogerCook]

I have a Canon (APS-C) 70D and have a 24-70mm but need something wider but don't like fish eye and would like to be able to use my Lee Filters with it. What do you guys have and how do you like them.

[Polar01]

I use the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 on my Nikon D70 and D7000 bodies. Myself I have never had any problem with the lens, it is 77mm which works across with other lens, I do use the Lee filter system, as the crop on my Nikons is 1.5 that makes 10mm to be 15mm with the filters I only go down to 11mm if using filters you will have to maybe go 13mm to not see any problems caused by the filters.

Cheers:

Allan

[DanK]

The most popular ultrawides for Canon APS-C, as far as I could tell when I was shopping for one, are the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 and the Canon 10-22. The Tokina is said to be very sharp, although a bit prone to flare and with the disadvantage of a small zoom range. I opted for the Canon because I wanted the longer range and did not care about speed, since I wanted it for landscapes, for which I would generally stop down. If you are interested in star trails, on the other hand, faster lenses are better.

If you don't need ultrawide, a good walk-around for outdoor work is the EF-S 15-85. The difference of 2mm from the standard 17mm is noticeable. This is wide enough for a lot of landscape work (35mm equivalent: 24 mm) but is not ultrawide. This was my standard outdoor walk-around lens on a 50D, until I switched to FF a few weeks ago.

I don't use Lee filters. The filter size of the 10-22 is 77mm. The filter size of the 15-85 is 72mm.

[jcuknz]

I only recently have had wider than 35mm AoV, now 28mm, and found stitching wih an editing programme met my needs .... so whatever lens you have which can carry the Lee filters will do except be cautious about using a polarising filter for the wide view as the sky varies its density depending on angle of sun.

[woof woof]

I originally went for the Canon 10-22mm but I was never happy with it and replaced it with a Sigma 12-24mm which is IMVHO a much better lens (and will work very well on FF too) but the disadvantage is that filters will be a problem at wider focal lengths.

Apart from the filter issue the plus points are... better build quality than the Canon, less distortion and in fact the Sigma displays no real distortion even on FF, less vignetting and a sharper image.

The minus though is that using filters is an issue at wider focal lengths but some people get around it by simply holding / bluetacing the filter to the hood or bucket (the hood is a permanent feature and the lens cap can be removed leaving the "bucket" in place.)

Other than the filter issue it's an outstanding lens.

[rpcrowe]

I am quite happy using my 12-24mm f/4 Tokina. I have the Mark-I version but, have not been troubled with the flare reported by many users and which the Mark-II version was introduced to minimize or eliminate...

[Brev00]

I also have the Tokina 12-24 but the DX II version. I find it to be sensitive to flare when shooting with the sun right off or in the frame. It also has high ca's when shooting subjects such as branches against the sun. What I like about the lens is its relatively low amount of distortion across all focal lengths making it easy to process images with horizons and buildings that need to be straight. I also find the 12-24 range to be very convenient allowing me to keep the lens on the camera for extended periods. Tokina's are well known for having very good build quality. The sturdiness of the lens is apparent and it is a joy to attach and operate.

[RogerCook]

I use the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 on my Nikon D70 and D7000 bodies. Myself I have never had any problem with the lens, it is 77mm which works across with other lens, I do use the Lee filter system, as the crop on my Nikons is 1.5 that makes 10mm to be 15mm with the filters I only go down to 11mm if using filters you will have to maybe go 13mm to not see any problems caused by the filters.

Cheers:

Allan

Thanks Allan

[RogerCook]

Thanks Dan.

[ajohnw]

If I am choosing a lens I generally have a look on here and also look around for photo's taken with it..

http://www.photozone.de/all-tests

Also found another recently nearly as informative at times.

http://www.ephotozine.com/

I just bought a 9-18mm for micro 4/3, so 18-36mm in full frame. I could have gone down to 7mm. The lens put me off but some shots gave me a sort of fish eye feeling as well. I did buy one a long time ago. Things have changed these days as shots can be defished but the most effective use of that I have seen - in my view - had a lot of subsequent seam carving. May as well have been shot with another focal length and even panorama used if needed. The other factor on 7mm is the wider it gets the more difficult it is for the lens.

I do pixel peep though and it is possible to get carried away with that but on the other hand some other aspects may matter.

John
-

[RogerCook]

Thanks for the links John.

[Glenn NK]

I used the Tokina 12-24 with my 30D. I still have the 30D, but never seemed to need anything as wide as the 12 mm end of the Tokina so I sold it (I have the Canon 17-55 for wider shots).

I felt the IQ was certainly adequate - likely at least as good as the Canon of the same range, but the build quality of the Tokina was as good as a Canon L lens - IWO, superb build quality.

Glenn

[RogerCook]

Thanks Glen

[RustBeltRaw]

I use a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. Quality is good, but not exceptional. Focuses a little slow if you're used to ultrasonic motors. For the money, it's fantastic, and it's more than wide enough to let me pull photos out of very, very tight environments. It's survived several color runs, so the build quality appears to be better than its slightly plasticky feel indicates.

Of course, I did drop it and break it in half recently. But that's my problem, not the lens's.

[Glenn NK]

. . . . so the build quality appears to be better than its slightly plasticky feel indicates.

Of course, I did drop it and break it in half recently. But that's my problem, not the lens's.

I had the feeling I could throw mine at something and the something would suffer, not the lens, so I'm surprised about what happened to your lens.

[RustBeltRaw]

Details here.

Despite a pretty solid outer casing, the majority of the glass, electronics, and controls are joined to the bayonet ring with a trio of spindly arms roughly cast in aluminum. Nothing unreasonable, given the lens's cost, but definitely a weak point.

On the other end of the spectrum, I bet you could literally throw one of my dad's Zenzanon primes through a thick plate-glass window with no ill effects. Would I drop one on concrete? Probably not. Really, I think surviving a concrete drop is asking a lot from any lens.

[RogerCook]

Thanks for the info, I want to see the pictures of the lens after the fall.

[Rob Ekins]

Roger,

I have the Canon Efs10-22 that I use on a 550D. I use it mainly for interior shots and am quite happy with it. Distortion is pretty easy to see in these type of shots and this lens has surprised me, I rarely have to do much correction in CS6 after the the lens profile is selected in RAW even at 11-12mm which is about as wide as I go.


I paid $600 for it and think it is great value. It takes 77mm filters so I am not sure how that works with your Lee set up.


Robbie.