Neither is really suited to landscape work especially when on a crop body like the 40D. Both are good for indoor work though, depends what your shooting indoors really.
For landscapes you will be wanting 24mm at least, preferably less.
yeah as above. I recently bought a 50 1.7, and tbh its not much use for indoors either - far too "close". Gonna replace it for a fast, wider lens in time
Landscapes is possible if people take a few metres step back. One is never limited to using less than 24mm for landscape if the distance isn't a limit. I've shot landscapes with my 50mm f2.0 on my Olympus E620, that's 100mm in old school. It's sharp and it works after taking a good few metres back to fit frame.
Anyway, back to OP, I'd say perhaps the Sigma 30mm is more what you're looking for?
It's a BIG BRIGHT lens. Great for indoors, great for 'landscapes' and also very useful for portrait shots too (more portraits with interesting background shots). I almost got it for my E system if it weren't so damn big on my system
thanks chaps, il look at the sigma 30 & the wider cannons. I have a cannon 17-85 so i can try out the focal length, i am looking for better iq & around f2
It's Four-Third and getting a decent Bokeh is pretty easy actually. I've not found the need to shoot a smooth bokeh at the wider-end so haven't seen it as a problem yet. (Wide for me is landscape, street or group shot where Bokeh isn't needed)
The Sigma 30mm is fantastic lens, brilliant for low light photography and wide enough to be useful inside on a crop sensor (I got rid of my nifty 50 as it was too zoomed for indoor use a lot of the time)
It's gone up a load in price though, seems its up to near £400 in plaes that I have looked. I paid around £240 nearly a year ago!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.