Wide angle lens for the EOS 7d

[ashish]

Hello,

I am confused in making a choice between the Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM and the EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM. I use a Canon EOS 7D and currently have 2 lenses - EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS kit lens and the EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM. I plan to use it for both natural landscapes and urban landscapes.

Also, alternative recommendations are welcome.

Looking forwards to your thoughts.

Thanks,
Ashish

[Donald]

Ashish

A very nice dilemma to have.

It very much comes down to what focal range you want and the quality of the glass you want to cover that range.

At the moment you have everything from 18mm to 200mm covered. And from 70mm upwards that is covered by L quality glass.

Do you want L quality glass to cover from 24mm all the way to 200mm? If so, then you have your answer.

Do you want L quality glass to cover the 16mm - 35mm range, leaving non-L quality glass to cover the 35mm - 70mm range? Is, so you have another answer.

Do you need f2.8 across the 24-70mm range or would it be more useful to have f2.8. at the 16-35mm range?

I suggest the answers to these questions will guide your thinking.

[ashish]

Do you want L quality glass to cover from 24mm all the way to 200mm? If so, then you have your answer.

Do you want L quality glass to cover the 16mm - 35mm range, leaving non-L quality glass to cover the 35mm - 70mm range? Is, so you have another answer.

Do you need f2.8 across the 24-70mm range or would it be more useful to have f2.8. at the 16-35mm range?

I suggest the answers to these questions will guide your thinking.

Hi Donald,

You've given me plenty of food for thought

Since i use an 1.6x body the effective range of the 24-70 would be around 38 - 112. My worry is whether this would serve the purpose of a true wide angle. Having said that the 16-35 leaves a gap in the range covered by the L series lens.

[Donald]

My worry is whether this would serve the purpose of a true wide angle. Having said that the 16-35 leaves a gap in the range covered by the L series lens.

The question you are then left with is whether your need if for L quality and f2.8 in the 18/24 range, because you have that covered with your existing lens. How often do you foresee the need to shoot at between 18 - 24? And when you do, do you need a lens of the highest quality and with f2.8.

Given that you say you're intended use is for landscape and urban scenes, I cannot imagine situations in which you would need/want f2.8 over f3.5. I would think you'd always be shooting at wider apertures.

[ktuli]

Ashish,

Since you are working with a 1.6x sensor, if you don't require L glass, then Canon makes a 10-22 lens that is very nice, and Sigma makes a 10-20 lens that I am also very pleased with.

- Bill

[dake]

More food for thought. Consider the L series 17-40mm f3.5 at half the cost of 16-35.

[ashish]

Since you are working with a 1.6x sensor, if you don't require L glass, then Canon makes a 10-22 lens that is very nice, and Sigma makes a 10-20 lens that I am also very pleased with.

- Bill

I was wondering whether to invest in an EF-S lens as it will be of no use if i upgrade to a FF camera down the line.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Ashish,

In reality the focal length of a lens isn't important - what really matters is the field of view ("angle") that the lens gives you. Of course the two are related, but what I'm getting at is that you really need to work out just how wide a scene you need to capture, and then work backwards to find the focal length that corresponds to that FoV.

Case in point - I shot many scenes with a 20D and the 24-70mm lens - so the field of view offered by the 24mm on a crop-factor camera was OK for me - if that's OK for you too then start with the 24-70. If it's not, then you'll have to go for the 16-35.

For what it's worth, there has been talk of a 24-70 IS lens for ages -- so long in fact that it MUST almost be here! So armed with that "sure thing / insider knowledge" (not!), a 16-35 may be a better gamble if you don't need the 35-70mm range.

[rpcrowe]

I sold my 24-70L because after purchasing the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens; I seldom carried the 24-70L anymore. I did use the 24-70L in my studio for several years where it does have a few advantages (such as a bit longer focal length and a slightly better subject to image ratio) but, since I no longer shoot professionally, I couldn't see keeping that lens AND my 17-55mm.

I didn't carry the 24-70L anymore because when I was using that lens as a walk-around glass, I needed a wider lens to compliment it. I am not a wide angle lover by any stretch of the imagination but, 24mm is just a bit tight for me on a 1.6x camera. The 24-70L is a darn heavy lens and, considering that I felt I needed a wider lens to compliment it; it was just too heavy a package for my present uses.

I love the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS combination on a pair of 1.6x cameras. I presently use a 7D and a 40D (although up to recently, I have been using a 30D and a 40D). The 17mm side of this lens is plenty wide enough for virtually all my general purpose and travel photography and there are several other advantages in using the 17-55mm as my shorter zoom; IS being one of the most significant. I am quite happy with the 1.6x format and absolutely LOVE my new 7D.

With two cameras and the above pair of lenses, I have a 17-200mm focal range at my finger tips with great IQ, IS and fast A/F throughout. The weight is no problem since my 40D and 7D wearing the 17-55mm f/2.8IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses weigh less than a single camera with 24-70L and a 70-200mm f/2.8L (series) lens. Oh yes, I don't really notice the gap between 55mm and 70mm when using two cameras but, do notice it if I try to shoot with a single camera and the two lenses.

This is just my solution to having a wide focal range without losing quality and with an f/2.8 aperture (+ IS) in my mid-range zoom and an aperture with which I can live (f/4 + IS) in my telephoto zoom. It would not work for everyone but, I just love this system.

I carry the two cameras using an OPTECH Dual harness ( http://optechusa.com/dual-harness.html ) which distributes the weight of my pair of cameras and lenses across my shoulders rather than hanging from my neck. I can disconnect either camera from the Dual Harness and attach it by the same connection straps to an OPTECH single neck strap if I choose to use a single camera. BTW, as an added help, I have lightweight carabiner clips attached either to the side belt loops of my trousers or the side adjustment straps of my photo vest. These clips provide additional security from the cameras swinging from side to side when I am running or climbing and (I HOPE) may provide a (SLIGHT) bit of security from a snatch and run thief.

[ashish]

Although i have the 18-70mm range covered with my 18-135mm kit lens, i'm not too happy with the performance of the kit lens. It produces reasonably sharp images at f/8 and average images at higher stops. This is a limitation and hence am looking for a better option.

The EF - S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM seems to be a highly rated lens based on the reviews that i have read. Only downside is that it will be redundant in case i need to upgrade to a FF camera.

The 24-70L seems to be a good bet overall but i think i will mull over it for some more time before taking a final call.

In the interim any suggestions / thoughts are welcome.

Thanks,
Ashish

[Eric M]

As a Canon shooter myself, I'd recommend the 17-55IS (sold a 24-70 to get it, no regrets) as a standard lens tht will do wide angle. For some real fun, try a Sigma 10-20. I've owned one for years (the original f/4-5.6 version) but wouldprobably get the 8-16 Sigma if I were buying today.

[ions]

As Colin stated what you see is what's important. If you truly want to see wide on a 7D then you have to go with an EF-S lens, I like the Tokina very much as long as you don't point it directly at too strong of a light source. If you pick a good lens that is always in demand, such as the Tokina (or the Sigma or Canon wide angle EF-S) appear to be you can sell them for the majority of what you paid when/if you go to fullframe. Consider the money lost a rental fee for several months use. Provided you don't beat the lens up. Myself, I'd do a EF-S wide angle and the 24-70.

And FWIW, Canonrumors.com says that the 24-70L Mk II IS patent has been officially filed alongside a handful of other lenses. It is finally coming.