Canon 24mm wide

rwalsh81 · Jul 6, 2017

So I'm looking at picking up the 24mm wide lens for some landscapes along the waterfront and lending to my folks for a trip overseas. Before I go and spend the money, I'm just curious as I'm still new to this level of photography. I'm shooting on the SL1 when I got it, the camera came with two lens an 18-55mm and a 70-300mm. In the description of them neither says anything about wide, so since 24mm is obviously between the 18 and 55 range would getting this lens be overkill? Or does it actually does it actually get more into the shot for landscapes?

weepete · Jul 6, 2017

the focal length is 24mm and that won't change, so the view through the viewfinder will be the same as your 18-55mm extended to 24mm. Saying that it is a prime, so should be a bit sharper than your zoom.

24mm is a pretty decent focal length for landscapes and traditionally the 24, 28 and 35mm were wide angle lenses of choice for 35mm film cameras. Nowadays it's slightly more complicated with digital as sensor size also has an effect on the field of view.

so it won't be as wide as the 18mm focal length, but how much to cram inside a shot is not the only consideration when choosing a focal length. Perspective also comes into play as the wider you go, the more squished things become around the middle of the lens. This can be detrimental if your shot includes mountains as they can appear smaller than they seem to our eyes. The effect neutralises at about 50mm which is similar to what our eyes see. Above 50mm the opposite starts happening.

Anyway the long and short of it is 24mm is a good compromise between a wide field of view while retaining decent vertical height in landscapes.

benhasajeep · Jul 6, 2017

I would hold off on a 24mm prime lens. That's more for people who have a specific need. For general travel I would suggest a super wide lens to compliment what you currently have. Tokina makes a very good 11-20mm f/2.8 lens for Canon mount. About $475 new. I have the older 11-16 lens for Nikon and still use it. Sigma also makes a good ultra wide for Canon 10-20mm f/3.5. This is for $400 (don't get the older f/4-5.6, good but new version better).

Another idea I have is to get a lens thats good for low light. Sigma has a new 30mm f/1.4 Art lens for Canon. $450. This would be a normal view lens like your eyesight looking at a scene. But it has a very large aperture. Very good low light lens.

table1349 · Jul 6, 2017

Yep as stated above, you already have the 24mm covered, and even wider. Something else to consider for landscapes: Why you Need a Telephoto Zoom Lens for Landscape Photography

Derrel · Jul 6, 2017

If you want to get a 24mm, I would consider the small, compact Canon 24mm f/2.8 EF-S STM "pancake" lens that Canon offers...it is right now, $149 US dollars from Canon, USA range, and woiulkd make a VERY compact, carryable "semi-wide-angle" lens. On an APS-C Canon, a 24mm lens is not a true wide-angle,m but what many tofday consider a semi-wide-angle lens. For me, being older, I grew up in the era in which a 35mm equivalent FOV lens (which the 24 will be when useed on your AL-1) was considered wide-angle.

EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM

Anyway, that all being said, look at the link above from gryphonslair99, regarding the utility and usefulness of a telephoto lens for landscapes! I 100% agree, and myself, DISLIKE using a wide-angle lens for most of my own landscape shooting; I prefer a telephoto lens for most of my landscape shots.

rwalsh81 · Jul 6, 2017

The canon 24mm f/2.8 stm is the one I was looking at. From some of what I've read for the sort of landscapes I'll be shooting and those my folks will when they borrow that one is better fitting for the current needs. I do like the ultra wide but I'm not quite there yet. That will probably be my next purchase after this and the canon 50mm from what I've read that's great for night shots where the stock lens while having 50mm doesn't do well for night shooting.

TCampbell · Jul 7, 2017

A 24mm lens would be a pleasant wide-angle on a full-frame body. But on an APS-C sensor body (such as your SL1) the lens is just fractionally wider than a normal angle of view ("normal" means the lens will seem neither "wide" nor "narrow"). When the focal length of a lens matches the diagonal measure of the sensor, then that lens would provide a 1x magnification (i.e. a "normal" angle of view which appears neither magnified nor reduced).

For your camera, that's roughly 28mm... so 24mm is just slightly wide.

A wide lens would be something like the EF-S 10-22mm or EF-S 10-18mm.

rwalsh81 · Jul 7, 2017

Thanks, that gives a much easier description for a noob to follow. Those lenses are a little more than I was looking to pay but I may have to take a moment and think about it.

rwalsh81 · Jul 7, 2017

One question would that 10-18mm be good for sky shots? Or would the 24mm prime still be good for that? or is my 18-55mm kit lens sufficient?

rwalsh81 · Jul 8, 2017

Thanks for the help went to the store today and bought a kit came with the 10-18mm ultra wide and the 50mm prime lens. Can't wait to see the shots I get with these.

benhasajeep · Jul 9, 2017

You should be happy with those lenses. Nice ultra wide, and the 50 would be good for portraits. Just about in the sweet range for portraits on a Canon crop sensor (80mm).

TCampbell · Jul 17, 2017

One tip about using very wide angle focal lengths...

Objects or elements that should appear to be vertically plumb may appear to "lean".

If the camera lens is perfectly level (not pointed slightly upward toward the sky or slightly downward toward the ground) then "vertical" elements in the photo will remain vertical.

If the camera lens is pointed upward (pointed toward ceilings or sky) then vertical objects will appear to lean inward to the center of the frame.

If the camera lens is pointed downward (toward the floor or ground) then vertical elements will appear to lean outward -- away from the center of the frame.

These can be corrected in some post processing programs (for example Lightroom or Photoshop -- it's basically a "keystone" adjustment) but you can avoid the need for that if the camera lens is level to the horizon line when you capture the shot.

This is mostly something you'll notice at very wide angles.

TallDude · Jul 17, 2017

Here's an example of what Tim's talking about. I was sitting low and aiming slightly upwards when I took this shot. It was taken at 17mm wide on a crop frame like yours. You can see the vertical columns appear to be leaning away from the center.