With all the recent announcements and rumors for ultra wide zoom options for Canon, which lens are your grabbing for from your real or imaginary gear bag? 
Choose your Weapon: Ultra Wide Zooms for Canon
- Thread starter andrewflo
- Start date
Can't really vote on this one. The one I have and use a lot is my only EF-S, the 10-22. I only regret that it's one lens I never will be able to carry over to a - imagined, and longed for - FF camera. If they release it with EF mount and make it slightly faster, I will be all over it like flies on a turd.
Upvote
0
I was going to go get a Canon 10-18mm next week but now I'm waiting. I had talked myself
into making do with the horrid aperture range for 300bucks, especially when I'd mostly be
using it for landscapes. But when I saw the rumor for the 15-30mm from Tamron I decided
to wait. If it's under a grand and as good optically as their new 24-70mm I'll grab one and
that will give me more versitility with the faster aperture and image stabilitzation. I've found
that 20-24mm (FF equivalent) is about the focal length I like the most for wide angle and so
the 15mm for aps-c would be right on the money.
What are people's speculations for price? Will it be more or less than Tamrons 24-70mm f/2.8 VC?
into making do with the horrid aperture range for 300bucks, especially when I'd mostly be
using it for landscapes. But when I saw the rumor for the 15-30mm from Tamron I decided
to wait. If it's under a grand and as good optically as their new 24-70mm I'll grab one and
that will give me more versitility with the faster aperture and image stabilitzation. I've found
that 20-24mm (FF equivalent) is about the focal length I like the most for wide angle and so
the 15mm for aps-c would be right on the money.
What are people's speculations for price? Will it be more or less than Tamrons 24-70mm f/2.8 VC?
Upvote
0
I like the range 16-35 f/4 on ff. it's plenty sharp, has good color and contrast, "is" and it takes normal filters. You can even use 2 filters like a nd2 and a polarizer without vignetting. Its weather sealed, not too heavy and a reasonable price. For aps-c I really like the sigma 8-16, its super wide and just about as good as the 16-35 on ff but it doesn't have is, or take filters.
Upvote
0
I use the Nikon 14-24f/2.8 on the 5DMK III with a Novoflex adaptor, requires Manual Focus, but it's Landscape so works fine.
Works better on the D3x.
I also use the Canon 8-15f/4, mostly @ 15, find it's a pretty good Lens at 15, certainly better than the older 15f/2.8 Prime.
The Canon 16-35f/2.8 I've almost given up on, all the Canon Primes in this Range work much better, 14f/2.8, 24f/1.4, 35f/1.4, and the Zeiss primes in this range work better than the Canon primes, as long as your Ok with Manual Focus.
Works better on the D3x.
I also use the Canon 8-15f/4, mostly @ 15, find it's a pretty good Lens at 15, certainly better than the older 15f/2.8 Prime.
The Canon 16-35f/2.8 I've almost given up on, all the Canon Primes in this Range work much better, 14f/2.8, 24f/1.4, 35f/1.4, and the Zeiss primes in this range work better than the Canon primes, as long as your Ok with Manual Focus.
Upvote
0
phoenix7 said:
The new 10-18 looks really good. Wide aperture isn't important to me for a landscape lens because you want to shoot it around f/8 or f/11 on aps-c so that's where the is comes in handy so you can shoot handheld and keep your iso down to earth. It takes filters too!
Upvote
0
eml58 said:
I have the 15mm and like it a lot especially with the software we have nowadays like dxo that corrects the aberrations and let's you de-fish it all or partially. I was interested in getting the 8-15 but I am not really into circular shots and I didn't think it was supposed to be any better at 15 than the prime? Is it?
Upvote
0
candc said:
I use both primarily for Underwater Imaging, the newer 8-15f/4 is a much better Lens @ 15 than the older 15f/2.8 @ f/4. The usability of the 8-15 is more restricted as you get lower than say 12mm, at this point it's more about Fun than good Images, still , fun is what Photography is supposed to be about.
For Lanscape work I lean towards the Zeiss 15f/2.8 & Zeiss 21 f/2.8 where the Manual Focus isn't an issue.
The Nikon 14-24f/2.8 is better than anything that Canon currently makes in the Range, but this is a subjective viewpoint, although based on My owning both the Canon 16-35f/2.8 & the Nikon 14-24f/2.8, I've used both these lenses extensively in Underwater Imaging and Landscape, the Nikon beats the Canon in every way, unfortunately. I'de love to see Canon bring a 14-24f/2.8 to Market with the sharpness of the 17 & 24 TSE lenses or even as good as the Nikon.
Upvote
0
8-15mm f4 L
Tokina 11-17
Both work great for me, but did not make your list. The 11-17 is a nice lens on my 1D Mark IV, and the 8-15 does free on FF to crop.
Tokina 11-17
Both work great for me, but did not make your list. The 11-17 is a nice lens on my 1D Mark IV, and the 8-15 does free on FF to crop.
Upvote
0
I love my Sigma 8-16mm and would vote for it.... but the vote / poll is only for FF.
I have used the Canon 10-22mm, Sigma 10-20mm on APS-C, but the Sigma 8-16mm is still my favourite.
On a friend's FF I have used 17-40mm, but would probably prefer the new 16-40mm f/4 because of the IS.
I've heard good reports of the EF-S 10-18mm IS and the EF-M 11-22mm IS too.
Paul
I have used the Canon 10-22mm, Sigma 10-20mm on APS-C, but the Sigma 8-16mm is still my favourite.
On a friend's FF I have used 17-40mm, but would probably prefer the new 16-40mm f/4 because of the IS.
I've heard good reports of the EF-S 10-18mm IS and the EF-M 11-22mm IS too.
Paul
Upvote
0
eml58 said:
You might want to give the new 16-35 f/4 a try. I am not sure its suited for underwater photography, I think that's an an application like astrophotography where a faster lens is desireable but for general landscape shooting it's great. it doesn't go as wide as some would like but it goes to 35 and that is a plus for me. It's sharp at f/4 and doesn't need to be stopped down unless you want more dof.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
