Wide angle lenses recommendations? Thinking of a Sigma...

[bramley]

Hi folks,

I'm gonna sell an old Sigma 70-300 and my Canon 2x converter and get myself a wide angle lens. Trouble is I don't want to spend a fortune so am avoiding the obvious choice, a 17-40L.

Looking around it seems I could get a Sigma 15-30 for £260 or a 17-35 for £289.

This is to use on a 5D and other lenses I have are 24-105L, 50mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8 and 100mm macro lens. The Sigma I'm selling isn't great so maybe that's making me apprehensive of turning away from a 17-40L in favour of a cheaper Sigma - are these valid concerns? Should I wait and get a 17-40? Will I regret getting a Sigma?

Any thoughts welcome.

[MonkeyHanger]

bramley said:

Hi folks,
The Sigma I'm selling isn't great so maybe that's making me apprehensive of turning away from a 17-40L in favour of a cheaper Sigma - are these valid concerns? Should I wait and get a 17-40? Will I regret getting a Sigma?

Don't judge the EX lenses by comparing with the 70-300.

I have the 15-30 and the image quality is very nice, if a little "soft" at the edges but that's being picky. I bought it because the number of times i use a wide angle over the course of a year made the 17-40L an unnecessary expense. I don't think i'd change now even if i were using wide-angle more regularly to be honest.

Edited by MonkeyHanger on Tuesday 23 October 17:15

[V6GTO]

I've got the Sigma 12-24 DG HSM and am very happy with it.

Martin.

[mcgus]

another vote for the 12-24. I use it on a 5D and it can give amazing results. I too have a 24-105 as well as the 100 macro. I reckon the 12-24 is the best option. the 17-40 is too overlapping with the 24-105.

[bramley]

The 12-24 sounds interesting - must admit I'd have assumed that lens was for cropped sensors only given the focal length - it must be amazingly wide on a 5D. A wide angle lens appeals to me for it's 'fun' element of distorting things and making dramatic perspective so I'll see if I can try a 12-24. Incidentally I've found that kerso bloke does the 17-40 for £400 which is a bargain - cheaper then warehouseexpress sell the 12-24 in fact.

[Pupp]

10-20 EX is fun and generally crisp in my experience... pretty much permanent fixture on my D70 second body

[LotusJas]

bramley said:

The 12-24 sounds interesting - must admit I'd have assumed that lens was for cropped sensors only given the focal length - it must be amazingly wide on a 5D. A wide angle lens appeals to me for it's 'fun' element of distorting things and making dramatic perspective so I'll see if I can try a 12-24.

I am considering a wide lens too and had the Sigma 12-24 on my shortlist. I tried it on a 5D body and it was good but the benefit of the 12-15 range did not outweigh the disadvantages of a relatively inferior lens to the Canon 16-35 or 17-40. As I value brightness for a wide zoom given I will use it indoors, I am going with the 16-35.

Edited by LotusJas on Wednesday 24th October 12:45

[jagdpanther]

Pupp said:

10-20 EX is fun and generally crisp in my experience... pretty much permanent fixture on my D70 second body

The 10-20 EX produces some lovely crisp shots, but its still hard to believe just how wide the lens can go!! Excellent piece of kit

[Rag_It]

Excellent topic, i was about pester Steve, as i know he has one, but since the topic is here, i may as well post some drivel!

Still being very new to photography in DSLR terms, and anything other than point and shoot, have a Nikon D50 with kit lens and also Tamron 70-300 which i use a lot for motorsport, and attempting to pan!

I am off to NY, and it is my birthday, so thought maybe whilst out there it would be a good idea to pick up a 10-20mm lens for photography in NY, and also for landscapes back here.

I guess my questions are: Is the lens as good as people say? I understand at 20mm CA is quite bad, however between 10mm-16 is great and very sharp.

Are there better lenses for the money? I thought about a 50mm prime, as relatively inexpensive, yet brilliant fast glass!

I am perfectly happy with the D50 body for now, as to be honest i still have a long way to go before i can justify buying something better!

Thanks,

David

[jagdpanther]

Rag_It said:

Excellent topic, i was about pester Steve, as i know he has one, but since the topic is here, i may as well post some drivel!

Still being very new to photography in DSLR terms, and anything other than point and shoot, have a Nikon D50 with kit lens and also Tamron 70-300 which i use a lot for motorsport, and attempting to pan!

I am off to NY, and it is my birthday, so thought maybe whilst out there it would be a good idea to pick up a 10-20mm lens for photography in NY, and also for landscapes back here.

I guess my questions are: Is the lens as good as people say? I understand at 20mm CA is quite bad, however between 10mm-16 is great and very sharp.

Are there better lenses for the money? I thought about a 50mm prime, as relatively inexpensive, yet brilliant fast glass!

I am perfectly happy with the D50 body for now, as to be honest i still have a long way to go before i can justify buying something better!

Thanks,

David

I can personally vouch for the 50mm prime as Ive recently purchased one, although its taking me a while to get used to the sheer amount of bokeh and the relatively short focus distance (if you know what I mean) but it is a very fast, very light, very sharp lens which should be in everyones kit bag!

I bought the F1.8 mk2 for £60 including delivery, brand spanking new with 1yrs warranty and its brilliant...the only problem I have found is that I dont want to use my 18-55 modified EF-S lens anymore, but dont have the money to buy a higher spec equivilant

The 10-20 is very wide and very sharp and I havent noticed any significant CA at 20mm...although at 10mm, some scenery shots can make you feel a little dizzy due to how wide the lens is

[cirks]

general concensus in the magazine tests (eg Digital Photo) is that the Canon 10-22 (which, obviously being EF-S is no use to you) just pips the Sigma in quality but that the Sigma is a cracking lens and actually won the most recent test they did due to the better value. Therefore, I can't see that you'd be disappointed in the Sigma (and others above seem to back this up).