Well, I've been shooting tons of stills, and a little video on my 5D mark III I got late last week.
What a blast.
I got the 24-105mm kit lens.
I also got the 85mm 1.8 prime.
For now, for what I want to do (and budget) I'm good for longer focal lengths.
I want to start researching now while saving...to get a nice UWA lens...for landscapes, maybe for some video too.
I've been starting to look at the 24mm 1.4 prime...I'd like to have that for having a wider aperture lens than my kit lens, and I do like prime glass so far, the little I've worked with it.
But I was thinking...with my kit lens, I do have 24mm covered...
So, was looking at the 16-35mm 2.8 zoom. It wouldn't be quite as good at low light as the 24mm 1.4 prime...but it would get me to much wider angles, and I think I'd like that.
I don't know much yet about the fish eyed lenses...do those all shoot the round fish-eyed distorted pictures...and are all pretty much specialty lenses just for that type picture? I might like to get something like that down the road...but for now, I want something with a more realistic perspective.
I've read about tilt shift wide angle lenses..but I've not quite figured out what the tilt shift does...although I have seen the results of one shooting very tall buildings, but I'm not sure yet how to work one...etc. I might try renting one first to see what exactly it does.
So, at least for now...I think my choices for nice wide angle, with good low light capabilities...would either be the 16-35 2.8 or the 24 1.4 for stills and video.
Can anyone comment on which of these might be better? Strengths / weaknesses of either choice? Is there an option I've missed?
Thank you in advance,