Wide Angle

cyKey said:
Just set the 10-20 to 17mm ;)
Click to expand...


I wish it was that simple...

I did a test with regard to the differences with the various lenses at 17mm I have to see how the prime lens came out it's here:-

Mini Test

In my opinion the Tokina out does the Sigma's at 17mm without a doubt from the above test and shows what Primes are good at and that is taking pictures better than similarly priced zooms

[/obvious]

Of course the Canon 17m-40mm L is going to out do the Tokina at 17mm (not by a big margin I may add) due to the L glass but this is an extra £300 to splash out on the lens.

:)
 
I have the sigma 10-20mm on a 1.6 crop (350D) and its perfect for wide shots. I have borrowed a 17-40mm before, and the 17 wasn't quite wide enough for some shots!

I've tried it on my 35mm SLR which is a full frame and it barrells like a fisheye when its close to 10mm. I've also had a go on it on a 5D and it does the same. Still makes for some good pictures though :)
 
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.
 
On a 5D (no crop sensor) what would you guys recommend, I can't decide between the 17-40 and the 16-35

(just trying to assemble a list of lenses to purchase over the next few months)
 
dont have the 16-35, but i used the 17-40 on the 5D and its really nice. but as far as i can remember there is a bit of vignetting on the 17mm side.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom