Wide Angle Lens for both FF and Crop

Jarlie

TPF Noob!
Joined
Jun 24, 2014
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Location
Canada
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
So I am looking into buying a wide angle lens for the landscape photography that I do. I am currently using a T3i but I plan on upgrading to FF some day. I dont want this lens to be useless after I upgrade. Does anyone have any ideas of some good lenses that I should look into?
 
My father has a Sigma 12-24mm lens (I think, this one) which he uses with a 5D mk3. I don't know how much he uses it but from what few photos I've seen with it, I would have a look at it. I myself have a different Sigma wide angle lens for my Pentax K-5 II, which I find to have a pleasing performance to price ratio.
 
From Canon, your choices are the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L or the new f/4 version (considerably less expensive). 16mm is quite wide on a full frame, but less so on a crop-frame body. You may want wider for your current crop-frame.
Canon also has an EF 14mm f/2.8L prime lens... that's extremely wide on a full frame body and very wide on a crop-frame body. But that lens is very expensive (over $2k unless you can find a deal).
Lastly, they have the EF 8-15mm fish-eye. This is a VERY wide lens regardless of body... but it is a fish-eye. Most wide-angle lenses are "rectilinear" meaning they preserve "straight" lines as straight in the final image (angles will change... straightness will not.) A fish-eye is a "curvilinear" lens... straight lines will be rendered curved in the images you capture (the only exception is if the "line" happens to pass through the center axis of the frame.)

To get something a bit less expensive and versatile to both crop and full-frame, you'll need to look at 3rd party glass such as the aforementioned Sigma. I don't own crop-frame bodies anymore (well... I do but I only use my 60Da for astrophotography so it's only "lens" is the telescopes I use. I don't own any crop-frame lenses.)

The Sigma that Matt mentioned is, as far as I'm aware, the only "wide zoom" lens that mounts to a full-frame body which is "rectilinear" wide-angle AND has a focal length shorter than 16mm.

You can get shorter prime lenses (not zooms) and fish-eye... but not rectilinear wide-angle.
 
It's important to understand that "wide angle" for a crop sensor tends to run in the 10-20mm range. Wide angle for a full frame, on the other hand, tends to run in the 15-25mm range.

If you want to get a lens that will act as an UWA for both, you'll have to get a lens that's basically unusable at its widest zoom on the FF (the outer edges get cut off). Because of this, people typically purchase a FF wide-angle lens once they move on to the larger sensor.

For a crop, I'd suggest the new Canon 10-18 if you don't need a wide aperture. For FF, the Tokina 16-28 2.8 is pretty hard to beat in both price and performance.

If you want to be serious about landscape/architectural photography, the Canon TS-E 17 is pretty hard to beat, although it's not exactly a point-and-shoot lens.
 
I haven't used it but the tokina 12-28 is useable on full frame from I think 18-28
Read it when I was looking
 
For me personally, I only worry about it when I ready to upgrade to a full frame body. If I am not planning to do so this month, next month nor next 6 months, I will not worry about it too much and just get one that work well in cropped body.

I buy lenses to do what I want to do now, not something in the future. Between now and the time I upgrade to full frame (assuming I will, but I am not too sure even), the money I spend now is going to be best cost per solution. And I can enjoy now instead of after I upgrade to full frame. This is especially true for wide angle area. 10mm on cropped body is MUCH wider than 16mm on cropped body even if there are only 6mm different. In telephoto size, you may not see too much difference between 270mm and 300mm (30mm difference).

It is especially true if you are looking at use lens market. Based on what I learned in the past few years, A good quality lens usually hold it's value. If you get a used good quality ultra wide angle lens such as the one from Canon, Tokina or Sigma at decent price and by the time you ready to go with full frame and need to sell the lens, you won't lose too much. In fact, there were times the I sold the lens for what I bought the for and couple times I sold for more and made money after I use the lens for awhile. ( But of course, there are people do not like to deal with buy/sell hassle but that is how I lower my photography cost)

But then again, if you are going to upgrade to full frame in next few months, just get the best for the FF format and do not worry about cropped body.
 
Another option is the Samyang 14mm f/2.8, it's supposedly very sharp despite the weird distortion (fixed in PP) and at a very low price. Downside is that it's a manual lens.
 
I was quite happy with the EF-S 18-135 I had on my 30D and later 60D. That was sufficiently wide for indoor shots as well as outdoor shots. Note that I am not a fan of wide-angle distortion, as much of my work has people as the subject and noticeably large noses from wide angle lenses are not flattering to anyone. For landscape as well as unusually cramped shooting quarters, the 18 was sufficient.

Having come from 40+ years of film cameras, I knew I would be going full frame someday. So I started upgrading my lenses, staying all Canon as that's all I've ever had (except one Vivitar zoom eons ago). So, for the 'wide' end, I settled on a 16-35 f2.8L ii, which gave me the 'wide' I needed as well as a faster lens (wider aperture) for low light, no flash photography. A 24-105 f4L became my 'go to' lens for just about everything else.

After moving up to full frame 18 months ago, I discovered the 16-35 was a whole lot 'wider' than when it was on the 60D. As a result, it sees a lot less time on the camera as the 24mm end of the 24-105 is usually wide enough for me.

So, as TCampbell indicated above whether 16mm is 'wide enough' on your T3i (effective Field of View of a theoretical 25.6mm lens on a full-frame body) is your call. Depending on what your anticipated time frame (and cash availability) is, if you're thinking more like 3-5 years before getting a new camera, you may want to look at both EF-S lenses from Canon as well as comparable lenses from other vendors. That will not only take care of your immediate wide needs, but save some dollars for future purchases as well.
 
Tokina 12-28mm....works on DX from 12 to 28mm--and goes UP TO 28mm, which is VERY useful as a NORMAL lens on DX. It ALSO covers the full area of the FX frame from 18mm to 28mm

Tokina 12-28mm Review

This would be the best compromise lens for a DX-then-later-FX buying strategy, for the least money AND the best "range". 24mm and 28mm are two WIDELY differing lens lengths.

Take the Tamron 11-16mm...wow...ultra-wide to ultra-wide....ultra-ultra boring and far-away to merely ultra-boring and far-away and insignificant....no "range", no "zoom"...one set type of image, over and over. But 12mm to 28mm--now THAT is some serious "range".
 
The 17-40 f4 is my go-to wide angle. It's amazing if you don't need it often in low light, and cheap for an L lens. It's roughly equivalent to the 24-70 on crop, which is a very useful standard range. If you are shooting people a lot, the 24-70 range would probably be better for you as there is a lot of distortion with super wide angles.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top