Wide Angle Lens (Landscape Photography) for Canon DSLR ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter smr
  • Start date Start date

smr

smr

smr

Soldato
Joined
6 Mar 2008
Posts
8,761
Location
Leicestershire
Hi all,

I'm looking to buy a wide angle lens for landscape photography to mount on my Canon 700D and wondered if you guys had any recommendations as to what would make a good choice.

Thanks for any advice.
 
Or more reasonably the best options for a crop wide angle lens will be either (in no particular order):

Sigma 8-16
Canon 10-22
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
Tokina 12-24 f/4


There are a number of others wide angles from the likes of Tamron and Sigma but they aren't any better than the ones listed above IMO. All of the above either have unique points (super wide, super fast), very good IQ or both.

Personally I swear by the Tokina range; tack sharp, good apertures and built like tanks. I had a 12-24 on my Canon and now I have a 11-16 on my Nikon D7000.
 
Last edited:
With a low f stop for Northern Lights photography would be good too, I've read 2.8 or there abouts is good for this.
 
Northern lights? Then go for the 11-16, it's a no brainer. The extra stop or two will make a fair difference. You don't really need to worry about the DoF in shots like that as the foreground will still be in focus even a few feet away when focused at infinity.

DoF calculator suggests at 16mm and f/2.8 you will get everything in focus from 8ft to infinity... (Just for clarity).

The only negative for the 11-16 is the zoom range. It's almost disingenuous to call it a zoom, but that's the trade off you make for the fast glass.:)
 
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 is worth considering too although it's not 'that' wide on paper but I find 18mm is often plenty :) I prefer my 18-35mm to my 10-22mm EF-S lens

F1.8 would be a bit faster again for the glowy stuff in the sky
 
Amp34 said:
Northern lights? Then go for the 11-16, it's a no brainer. The extra stop or two will make a fair difference. You don't really need to worry about the DoF in shots like that as the foreground will still be in focus even a few feet away when focused at infinity.

DoF calculator suggests at 16mm and f/2.8 you will get everything in focus from 8ft to infinity... (Just for clarity).

The only negative for the 11-16 is the zoom range. It's almost disingenuous to call it a zoom, but that's the trade off you make for the fast glass.:)
Click to expand...

That Tokina lens has superb reviews, thanks. Looks a strong candidate.
 
Phal said:
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 is worth considering too although it's not 'that' wide on paper but I find 18mm is often plenty :) I prefer my 18-35mm to my 10-22mm EF-S lens

F1.8 would be a bit faster again for the glowy stuff in the sky
Click to expand...

Thanks Phal, will check it out, I have an 18-55 Canon lens at the moment but I thought getting more in with wide angle landscape shots would be pretty neat.
 
I have a Tokina 12-24, lovely lens :)

Definitely IMHO superior to the Canon 10-22, feels much better built.
Haven't tried the Sigma personally, but was put off by the reviews; Seems to be a wide variation in quality from good to absolute parp.

IS is largely irrelevant if you are using for landscapes on a tripod, so don't get bogged down by the lack of it.

-Leezer
 
If you want really wide then you can't beat the Sigma 8-16mm. It's the widest zoom, non fisheye available. Angle of view is 122 degrees !!
I had one for a year and it was just awesome.

This is at 8mm

8626680809_6333019a80_c.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info guys, the Tonika seems great, though I realise photography is expensive I am after something a bit cheaper than £400 so I'll look out for some mint second hand lenses. Got an expensive Holiday coming up soon!
 
smr said:
Thanks for the info guys, the Tonika seems great, though I realise photography is expensive I am after something a bit cheaper than £400 so I'll look out for some mint second hand lenses. Got an expensive Holiday coming up soon!
Click to expand...

Have a peak at the MPB site - they've got a fair amount of second hand stuff including the 10-22mm Canon since that's where I got mine from and you still get a years warranty.
 
leezer3 said:
Haven't tried the Sigma personally, but was put off by the reviews; Seems to be a wide variation in quality from good to absolute parp.

-Leezer
Click to expand...

Yeah I think that was generally accepted with the older lenses but the new lenses part of their Art/Sport/Contemporary ranges are pretty nice. That 18-35mm is very nice :)

I had the 120-300mm F2.8 Sport for a while too and that was pretty nice
 
Just looking at some 18mm Northern Lights shots and they look great, definitely something I'd be satisfied with. My current lens is a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.6-5.6 IS STM Lens though... so I'd still need something with a lower aperture (2.8) though?
 
Lenses for Hire are doing the Tonika for £50 / 7 days hire so I could go for that option as well and purchase one of my own in the future maybe.
 
I don't think you will need a lower aperture, these are typically long exposures anyhow. All mine were taken with the 10-22 @ f3.5.

*edit 1* I got some shots with 11s exposure @ f3.5 & ISO800, so for even if you went one stop up all you would have to do is increase the exposure time a little or bump the ISO up to 1600 - it will be fine. In fact, in hindsight I really wanted to try to retake some of my shots with a smaller aperture right up to f/8 as the 10-22 is quite soft around the edges fully open.

*edit 2* having said that a faster lens will give you more flexibility to try things out - a smaller shutter time will render the aurora differently, possibly with more detail on it's shape, a longer exposure may provide you more coverage as the aurora moves around and paints it's trails. It's all a balance of what you are trying to achieve.

If you are going to rent, have a look at the new budget EFS 10-18, very cheap, has IS (debatable if you need it, in fact should be off on the tripod) and the results seem pretty good although it's a stop slower.

https://www.flickr.com/search?text=Canon+EF-S+10-18mm
 
Last edited:
smr said:
Just looking at some 18mm Northern Lights shots and they look great, definitely something I'd be satisfied with. My current lens is a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.6-5.6 IS STM Lens though... so I'd still need something with a lower aperture (2.8) though?
Click to expand...

Well the Sigma 18-35mm lens is F1.8 all the way through which is definitely faster than your kit lens :) It doesn't really give you any new focal lengths though so it would depend whether you just want.

Like Genoma said, even F3.5 was fast enough for his shots so it's not impossible :)

That Tokina F2.8 lens is supposed to be alright too :)

http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/us...es/tokina-11-16mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-canon-fit-4

The new Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 wouldn't be a bad lens to look at if 24mm is wide enough. It's pretty cheap and sharp :)

You could look to simply replace your kit lens with the better EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 which is sharper and faster than your kit lens and still has IS

There's many possibilities lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom