Need a Wide Angle Lens

[feRRari4756]

Hey guys I like to do a lot of landscapes so I want a wide angle lens.

My max price is like $500 NEW. I will buy either a GOOD Sigma or A "prosumer" line canon lens.

My focal legnth has to be around 10-20 mm (it could also be a prime in that range).

I would prefer a prime with an aperture as wide as at least f2.8. BUT I will buy a f4 if its a good deal (like if there is an f4 L series for the same price as a f2.8 prosumer series i will buy the f4).

i dont want a kit lens. I want a very good one.

I have looked at these so far:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=12082&is=USA

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=217794&is=USA


Which one would you guys reccomend? Any other I should be looking at?

THANKS

 

[Jaszek]

If you would want one with variable aperture (4-5.6) you can take a look at the sigma 10-20mm. It is a great lens and I know a lot of people on here will agree with me. It is very sharp, just ask JerryPH, I know he has one, and also I think Dubious has one also.

 

[feRRari4756]

hmm is this the one you are talking about:

Sigma | 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Autofocus Lens | 201101 | B&H

This is not sarcasm--I am just asking questions to learn:

Why would I want that lens over the 1st link in the orignal post (Canon EF f2.8 20mm)? The canon one has a wider aperture and is probably slightly better quality (its the "prosumer" series).

 

[tsaraleksi]

It's twice as wide, and probably about the same image quality.

 

[invisible]

It's not a Canon nor a Sigma, but it's still a kick-ass lens:

Tokina AF 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX (Canon) - Review / Lens Test Report

Tokina | 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX Autofocus | ATX116PRODXC (it's a bit more expensive than the 10-20 Sigma, but it gives you 2.8)

 

[feRRari4756]

It's twice as wide, and probably about the same image quality.

What lens are you talking about? the canon right?

so your saying I should get the canon cas its the same quality, and have a "twice as wide" aperture, for the same price?

 

[JerryPH]

It is very sharp, just ask JerryPH, I know he has one, and also I think Dubious has one also.

The Sigma 10-20 is an awesome lens for the money, not as fast as others, but the widest lens on the market and the pictures you get from it are very very good:

Anyways, you said you wanted it for landscapes. For landscapes you NEVER use F/2.8 because you want the deepest DOF possible. Put it on a good tripodm set the aperture to F/8 and get tack sharp pics, and enjoy!

 

[Jaszek]

I guess I'll show off my pics also . Taken today, both at 10mm

 

[feRRari4756]

The Sigma 10-20 is an awesome lens for the money, not as fast as others, but the widest lens on the market and the pictures you get from it are very very good:

Anyways, you said you wanted it for landscapes. For landscapes you NEVER use F/2.8 because you want the deepest DOF possible. Put it on a good tripodm set the aperture to F/8 and get tack sharp pics, and enjoy!

Yes, i know you dont use f2.8 for landscapes, but why would I pay the same price for a lens that is limited to f4 when for the same price get a lens then is f2.8?

I am just wondering. And what one is better quality? That is one of my main concearns. Like build quality.

And also, the canon has a USM AF motor.

I cant find any justification in why the prices are the same.

**nice pics to both of you BTW

 

[invisible]

Well, if we are going to show off our lenses, here are some photos taken with the Tokina 11-16

 

[Dubious Drewski]

OOh, I am going to resist posting my favourite 10mm shots in here. I always go overboard. But take my word for it: for the money, the 10-20 is a great deal. I sure wouldn't mind having f2.8 sometimes, but f4 really isn't so bad. Considering that at 10mm, depth of field is ridiculously deep and camera shake is very hard to notice so longer shutter speeds are possible without consequence, somewhat negating the need for wide aperture.

Just keep in mind that this lens is Great at 10mm, but loses a hell of a lot of resolution at 20mm.

 

[Jaszek]

Well, if we are going to show off our lenses, here are some photos taken with the Tokina 11-16

remember you can always go 1mm wider with the sigma ...o and the build quality on the sigma is awesome, and its HSM which is sigmas version of USM

 

[invisible]

remember you can always go 1mm wider with the sigma

That is very true, and 1mm wider at this width is huge difference (10% more!). This not a minor detail.

But also true is that the Tokina gives you a MUCH wider aperture, a MUCH better build (the Sigma is not even close), and the same sharpness.

 

[JerryPH]

A little cheating...
F/7.1, ISO 6400 on a D700 and 10mm on the Sigma 10-20mm DX lens:



Click on the pic above for for a little bigger size. That Sigma at 10mm and F/7.1 is *sharp*. I do disagree with "dubious" there... I find no picture degradation at 20mm... in fact, it improves... barreling and distortion drops drastically, check the online specs that support this.

 

[tsaraleksi]

What lens are you talking about? the canon right?

so your saying I should get the canon cas its the same quality, and have a "twice as wide" aperture, for the same price?

No, we are talking about wide angle lenses, and the Sigma's focal length can go twice as wide as the Canon's. 20mm on a crop camera is a fairly pedestrian FL, whereas 10mm is a very wide angle lens.