Recommendation for lightweight and slim wide-angle prime (20-24 mm) for FF

[thewaywewalk]

I'm looking for a very slim and lightweight wide angle prime lens (20-24mm) to accompany my 6D on mountain hikes. I will use my 50mm 1.4 prime in general, but need something wider for landscapes. It's not my favorite style of photography and I will use it quite seldom, that's why I don't want to carry around so much and don't spend so much money. It's just the lens I want to have in my bag for some "must-have" shots.

Well the 24mm pancake would be perfect, but it's not for fullframe. Has actually somebody tried if you would get the the entire image frame on a FF-Body? (with strong vignetting though).

I already own the 40 mm pancake, but it's not wide enough.

I considered the Voigtlander Color Skopar 20mm f/3.5: http://amzn.com/B0000D81PX, but it's actually too expensive and I don't know if I'd like the lack of auto-focus.

The Canon EF 20mm f/2.8 USM seems appropriate for my case, but it is already quite big. What about the image quality?

Any recommendations?

To sum up:
- focal length: 20-24
- size: less than 6cm height would be nice
- price: less than 450$

Thank you!

 

[e17paul]

I don't own the 20/2.8, but have held off because of mixed reports. I do own the 24/2.8 IS, and it is probably my favourite lens. The focus is fast and silent, the IS allows crazy low shutter speeds where a tripod is not an option, and the colours have a pop missing from my Canon 50.

Canon EF-S lenses are designed not to fit Canon full frame cameras, so the 24 STM won't be an option when it becomes available next month. Apart from the mount incompatibility, the larger full frame mirror would typically clash with the rearmost element of EF-S lenses.

If the Voigtlander is over budget, then that also rules out the 24/2.8 IS. What about searching for a good second hand previous generation 24/2.8. If you can stretch to the current 24/2.8 IS, you will have no regrets.

I'm crossing my fingers that Canon will update the 20/2.8, but not holding my breath.

 

[DJL329]

I currently have the EF 28mm f/1.8, which I have used for at least 4 years and really like it. However, I have been considering the EF 24mm f/2.8 IS to replace it, as I sometimes want to get a bit wider.

on Flickr

on Flickr

If you cannot afford one of these new, try Canon's refurbished site:

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses#facet:-8109871051001014565110103108101&productBeginIndex:0&orderBy:&pageView:grid&minPrice:&maxPrice:&pageSize:&

 

[thewaywewalk]

28 mm is quite close to the 40mm I have, I don't know if it's really worth it to carry around two so similar lenses.

I will consider the 24/2.8. Nobody owns the Voigtlander? What about Sigmas?

 

[zim]

Just a thought, if your not going to be taking many (not your fav style) why not use your 40 pancake and stitch, you can get surprisingly good results and really good pano software is really cheap!

Regards

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Sigma does 20mm F1.8 lens, and also 24mm F1.8 but the image quality is pretty mediocre. .

Canon 28mm F1.8 also has bad contrastre and sharpness in the corners of the image. :-[ However, the image quality is greatly improved if you stop down to F5.6. :

Canon 24mm F2.8 Image Stabilizer has great quality and lets you shoot without a tripod when the light falls. Seems to me the best choice.

 

[Khufu]

28 mm is quite close to the 40mm I have, I don't know if it's really worth it to carry around two so similar lenses.

I will consider the 24/2.8. Nobody owns the Voigtlander? What about Sigmas?

Sigma's 20-24-28mm series of primes are fantastic - but I'm speaking as someone who likes to shoot people and activity within context, where these fast, wide lenses shine... but they're not light nor particularly small. I grab the super-old 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.8 mk1 and for compact, fast reach 100mm f/2 (all Canon EF) as my multi-FL/multi-purpose travel/light kit. IMO possibly the best compact & lightweight compromise FF selection

...but I know you said ~24mm - sooo, I'm wondering if you have used and really want 20-24mm for these landscapes? Apologies if that seems patronising but I know from mine and others' experiences that longer lenses with fun framing can actually get much more pleasing results and (super) wide often just doesn't satisfy - but I'll throw one last wildcard out...

it's not small nor particularly light but do you think you mightvget more use out of a zoom like the...
Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 ?! I love this thing and when it comes out to play it's pretty much as a 17mm f/2.8 prime for capturing super-close AND far detail, great for getting in your foreground grasses, textures etc... and for insane, unknown reasons this is both a discontinued and very affordable piece of kit

Re: the Sigmas: I'd generally recommend them for isolating close subjects from busy, wide backgrounds - for me that's animals and kids up close with pleasing bokeh and shallow DoF, otherwise they're big and heavy regarding your request, buddy!

If you do consider longer, that fast 28mm 1.8 DJL329 suggested or the 35mm f/2 are both small and awesome! I believe the former does vignette heavily but IMO looks great, if you're not one of those obsessive twonks we see on here who don't appreciate such artistic merit DJL329's pics, to me seem both riddled with vignetting and awesomeness. Nice ;D

 

[Khufu]

Ps. For a total of aroubd £15/$20 you could grab a Pentax or M42 adapter complete with AF confirmation chip and find an old 28mm f/2.8... I've got a Cosina(?) thing that's around the size of your 40mm pancake. Another wildcard, sorry
Oh and you might need to snap off some silly aperture lever thing if you go the Pentax route..

 

[thewaywewalk]

...but I know you said ~24mm - sooo, I'm wondering if you have used and really want 20-24mm for these landscapes? Apologies if that seems patronising but I know from mine and others' experiences that longer lenses with fun framing can actually get much more pleasing results and (super) wide often just doesn't satisfy - but I'll throw one last wildcard out...

I know, that's why I said "not my style" I don't like it neither. I generally use the 50mm. But imagine you stand in a valley surrounded by beautiful mountains and you just need to get them in the frame

It seems that I should stay with the 40mm or spend some more money on the 24/2.8 IS. Everything inbetween seems pointless to me.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

You won't be wrong with the 24mm f2.8 IS, IQ is fantastic

 

[Dantana]

I picked up the Canon 20mm used a few years ago. To be honest, I really haven't used it that much. When I bought it, I was still on crop and was looking for a lens in that range. I don't know if I've had it on my camera more than a couple times since I went full frame. I really should try it out again. I know that it never wowed me when I did use it.

 

[Random Orbits]

You won't be wrong with the 24mm f2.8 IS, IQ is fantastic

+1. Bought it from Canon's refurb store while on sale for ~410 including tax.

 

[thewaywewalk]

Just got the 24/2.8 IS in the Bay for about 370€/470$ (good price for europe).

So thanks for all your suggestions, it's hopefully alright

 

[JumboShrimp]

Took my new 24/2.8 IS to Shanghai for some night street shooting. Beautiful results and it is incredibly lightweight.

 

[yorgasor]

I really like my voitlander 20mm, it's small enough that I can throw it in my bag "just in case" and I've been pleased with the results. But the suggestion to get an old M42 mount lens may be more up your alley:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/S-M-C-Super-Takumar-20mm-F4.5.html

The SMC Takumars have an excellent build quality. I have a 35mm f/3.5 & 135mm f/2.5, they're 30-40 years old and look brand new. They'll be running strong long after my 5D3 is dust. I'd look at keh.com as a supplier, they're very well respected and have much more trustworthy ratings and prices than you'd get off ebay. For wide angle landscapes, manual focusing is not difficult at all. When in doubt, you can always fall back to live view.

 

[tapanit]

I really like my voitlander 20mm, it's small enough that I can throw it in my bag "just in case" and I've been pleased with the results.

Here's another vote for the Voigtländer. I use mine primarily for scenery shots (including stars and Northern lights) during wilderness hikes, where size and weight are a major consideration (having to carry also camping equipment, food &c) and lack of AF is irrelevant, and I've also been quite happy with the results.

 

[Snodge]

I also have the Voigtlander (made by Cosina) - it has a chip for focus confirmation, however I don't tend to use it as it has hyperfocal distance markings. It's a good lens rather than a great lens, but it was reasonably priced and it is very light. It also seems to work fine with an infrared filter. There is a thread for it in the lens gallery section too...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

That 20mm f/2.8 is available as a refurb for 15% off until 10/31 or they are all sold, so its well within your price range. Use discount code pumpkin13.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses/ef-20mm-f-28-usm-refurbished

It is heavy, but falls in your required focal length range of 20-24mm. There are very few if any primes in this range with autofocus and low cost/ low weight.

Focal Length & Maximum Aperture	20mm 1:2.8
Lens Construction	11 elements in 9 groups
Diagonal Angle of View	94°
Focus Adjustment	Rear focusing system with USM
Closest Focusing Distance	0.25m / 0.8 ft.
Filter Size	72mm
Max. Diameter x Length, Weight	3.1" x 2.8", 14.3 oz. / 77.5 x 70.6mm, 405g

 

[nc0b]

I would nix the Canon 20mm f/2.8. I bought it used when I was only shooting crop. On FF it was a dog in the corners, so I sold it and bought a Zeiss 18mm f/3.5. It isn't nearly as large as the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8, and I tend to shoot landscapes at f/8 or 11. While it is manual focus with confirmation in the viewfinder, I generally zone focus it. It does have full EXIF data saved to the image file. I bought mine used on eBay, though it is likely over your desired budget and possibly larger than you want. I find with landscapes I need something a few feet away in the frame to make a good composition. Shooting at f/8 or f/11 may require pushing the ISO up a bit, but on a 6D this is not a problem.

 

[Djaaf]

And another vote for the little voigt.

It's a fun lens. Simply using it is a pleasure, the manual focus thingy is not really an issue (especially when shooting landscapes, just set it at the infinity hard stop and be done with it...).

Resulting photo looks good too. f/3.5 to f/5 is not really the sharpest in the corner but it's manageable. f/5.6 to f/11, the lens is excellent across the frame.
On starry skies, it's not that good though. You'll get visible coma on the outer third of the image.
There's also a bit of CA from time to time, but that can be removed easily. Almost no flare though.


I've been playing with it for the last year or so and it's still one of my most used lens.

Djaaf.