Wide Angle

Alex53 · 2 Oct 2006 at 11:09

I'll get a full frame camera one day. Probably a 5D when they come down in price. Not because of the quality, though it's welcome, but because I want my lenses to be the focal lengths they were designed to be. I dont want long zooms to be longer, its not one of my needs. I do want my wide lenses to be wide, and on 1.6x crop even 18mm leaves me wanting wider.

While that happens, the solution is one of the digital only 10 or 12 mm lenses. Which ultra wides do you guys have and would recommend for a 300D and 10D owner? (Given that 10D = No EF-S, although ok with 3rd party 'digital only' lenses.)

Alex53 · 2 Oct 2006 at 11:35

Yeah. And it wont break the bank, but I've also read very mixed reviews on it. I just dont want to end up with a really horrendous lens.

I dont need blinding quality, especially as I'd use it for landscapes and/or in good light, so I could stop it down. I dont print especially large. If its optically comparable to the kit lens I am fine with that for now.

Alex53 · 2 Oct 2006 at 13:26

Oh I have absolutely no problem with primes. If the Sigma 10-20mm was a 10mm prime I'd pick it up gladly. In fact it would probably be faster and I'd take it to gigs

But the ultra wide primes are all more expensive and the 17mm would not really give me anything new focal length wise having the 18-55mm kit lens.

The 12-24mm would probably also be fine but the filters are definitely an issue here. In my part of the world (sunny Gibraltar) you definitely want a polariser.

Thanks for your comments guys

Alex53 · 2 Oct 2006 at 13:33

Hmm yeh I suppose at such a wide focal length I can get away with hand holding at 1/10s. It would also produce something different to the other lenses, because at a rock gig hardly any of the musicians are static enough not to cause some blur at that shutter speed.

Alex53 · 3 Oct 2006 at 07:59

I think I'm going to settle for a Sigma 10-20mm. At the end of the day I want 10mm on 1.6x. When I do get a FF the normal wide lenses will be wide enough, and I will still have my 10D or other 1.6x as a backup body anyway, where I can still use this lens.

Alex53 · 4 Oct 2006 at 10:43

Both are great lenses. Optically you are likely to be happy with either of them, but if your budget permits I'd go for the 16-35mm because it's a faster lens (f2.8 vs f4). Unless of course the 5mm extra reach are important.