Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: kevs on October 30, 2018, 04:57:57 pm

Title: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on October 30, 2018, 04:57:57 pm
I'm on Canon 5D 2 and widest thing I have is 24-70.

Just had a 1/2 talk with BH, but would love to hear recommendations on rectilinear wide angle (not fish eye), Canon or 3rd party. thanks.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: capital on October 30, 2018, 05:25:54 pm
Canon 16-35 F/4  covers a good general purpose range, is weather resistant with front filter, takes standard filters.

Rokinon 14 mm F/2.8, Good for casual astro photography. Very wide coverage, useful when you need to be right on top of the foreground elements, more so than the 16-35 Canon. Does not take screw on filter w/o investing in a cumbersome setup.

Since you've not stated an application, its hard to recommend anything in particular.

Venus optics has some very interesting lenses.

Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on October 30, 2018, 06:02:50 pm
thanks Capital,
He mentioned canon 16-35 2.8 and then 17-40 f/4, did not mention a 16 - 35 f/4.

He mentioned the Rokinon as very inexpensive lens. He said 14 can be difficult to work with vx 16 or 17 in terms of distortion?

Your opinion? How is Rokinon for quality?

This is for environmental portraits.

Never heard of Versus.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Two23 on October 30, 2018, 06:19:49 pm
Either a SIgma 20mm f1.4 or the 14mm f1.4.  Very different lenses.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: capital on October 30, 2018, 06:40:59 pm
16-35 F/2.8 is for subjects that need the extra stop wide open. If you are doing landscape photography F/4 suffices, you save a pound, and $1K USD.

14 mm rokinon has unusual distortion might not work for architectural settings. Resolution is adequate on a 5DM2 for 70% of the full frame, outer margin improves when stopped down.

Ultra-wide Venus optics: http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/981-laowa12f28

My suggestion is sift through this list to come up with some contenders given your coverage and F/stop requirements:

http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on October 31, 2018, 10:28:04 am
I'm another big fan of the Canon EF 16-35 f4L IS. Wonderful sharpness, lightweight and a great value.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: stever on October 31, 2018, 11:58:23 am
the stabilization of the 16-35 f4 opens up all kinds of hand-held low light possibilities.  it is optically much better than the old 17-40 and still reasonable size and weight. like all other wide zooms it is sharpest at the wide end, and even at 24mm is not as sharp as the 24-70 f4.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on October 31, 2018, 12:09:25 pm
thanks Guido/ Steve

1) Why is it optically better than 17-40?  Both L lenses
2) is the IS worth the extra $270?
3) I guess that is the one then I'd lean towards getting
4) The 16-35 2.8; you agree is overpriced at double the cost?  2k instead of 1k
5) I'm taking notes for future but actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you concur?  Would you spend 1k to get to 16mm/ 17mm?
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: stever on October 31, 2018, 10:40:49 pm
1) the 16-35 is a much newer design which i believe is better engineered for manufacturing - there seem to be few complaints of asyemetry in Canons recent wide and wide-tele zooms
2) it is if you shoot hand-held
4) i see little point in an F2.8 wide angle vs f4 with IS - at f2.8 there still isn't much out of focus at 16mm.  F2.8 is useful for night sky.
5) I use 16mm mostly for travel interiors and urben exteriors. at f4 the 16-35 is okay, but not great for night sky. 
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on October 31, 2018, 11:14:28 pm
Thanks Steve great: final opinion from you:

I'm actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you agree for that need maybe not really worth it to spend another 1k to just have a lens that goes 16/17 when I have 24, and portraits inside??
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: funfoto on November 02, 2018, 02:24:43 pm
Don't forget the Tamron 15-30mm.  Quite excellent and priced right...f/2.8 and stabilization to boot!
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 02, 2018, 02:44:36 pm
Tamron's are actually not priced nearly low enough to bail from Canon.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: MattBurt on November 02, 2018, 03:55:58 pm
I have the Pentax 15-30/2.8 that is the same design as the Tamron 15-30 and I really like it. I also have the Rokinon 14 and it can come in handy but the 15-30 is sharper and easier to use. Both of those lenses have designs that prevent normal filter use. The 15-30 is not small.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Shiftworker on November 03, 2018, 03:47:36 pm
I'd go for the 16-35 F4. I have used it on my Sony A7r2 with 42 MP and it holds up well across the frame at all focal lengths so it will be more than good enough on a 5D2. It's relatively light and small(ish) with very good build quality and has IS. You can also pick them up all the time on Ebay. It's as they say a 'no-brainer'
I've also got the Rokinon 14mm but it's got quite pronounced gull-wing distortion and needs careful focusing using live view as the edges and corners focus at different distances to the center. It's good value for a 14mm lens but the 16-35 is far more versatile well behaved.

Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 03, 2018, 05:17:35 pm
thanks what do they go for on ebay about? Can you trust ebay? finally

5) I'm taking notes for future but actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you concur?  Would you spend 1k to get to 16mm/ 17mm?
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Two23 on November 03, 2018, 07:04:09 pm
Have I missed where you told us what the lens is to be used for, and why you think you need one?  That's the WHOLE thing--match the lens to the purpose.  If you're wanting a wide lens for night shooting, I suggest the Sigma 14mm f1.4.  If you want a wide lens for general purpose night shooting I suggest the Sigma 20mm f1.4.  If you want a wide lens for daytime landscapes, I suggest the Canon 24mm t/s.  (It can make the widest shots of any Canon lens.)  If want want something relatively compact and a value price wise, a 16-?? or 18-?? f4 lens will do that.  There are a lot of choices, but you must have a very clear idea of what you want the lens to do before you can select one.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: stever on November 03, 2018, 07:09:40 pm
There's little downside for using 24mm for a while and thinking about where it limits you.  if you want to experiment with wider angle get an L-plate and nodal slide and try some 5 frame vertical stitches.

the other problem with the Rokinon is that you can't zone focus since the scale on the lens is completely inaccurate.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 03, 2018, 07:27:03 pm
Two, yes I said environmental portraits.

Stever, what is L-plate and nodal slide ?  (generally not into tiring computer things)

Again, for those who do indoor portraits, maybe are none here:


5) I'm taking notes for future but actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you concur?  Would you spend 1k to get to 16mm/ 17mm?
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Two23 on November 03, 2018, 08:01:38 pm
Would you spend 1k to get to 16mm/ 17mm?

If I needed it, yes.  If I had to ask if I needed it, I would then assume I don't need one.  I rarely use my 20mm f1.8G--only when I need the low light capability (astro photos etc.)  For my wide angle needs I use the Nikon 24mm PC-E (shift lens).  It makes perfect landscape panos, and is the best choice for architecture images too. It's my most used lens.  I rarely use anything wider than 35mm for portraits, and those are generally group or "street" photos.  For street photos I prefer a small 28mm.


Kent in SD
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Craig Lamson on November 03, 2018, 08:31:36 pm
I'm on Canon 5D 2 and widest thing I have is 24-70.

Just had a 1/2 talk with BH, but would love to hear recommendations on rectilinear wide angle (not fish eye), Canon or 3rd party. thanks.

The 16-35 is not much of an upgrade from the 24-70.  The 17-40 is just an ok lens.   Iíve had both. 

Now the 11-24...oh my!  Itís very nice, I use mine on a 5ds.   Highly recommend this lens.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 03, 2018, 09:11:43 pm
TWO, good point, I'm having to ask so that probably means I'm ok with 24 wide angle on 24 to 105; sorry I have 24-105 not 24 to 70.

Craig, please expand:  "The 16-35 is not much of an upgrade from the 24-70"

For wide angle portraits, when at 16 or 17 setting on the 16-35,  not much better or worth spending 1-2k  that when on 24 setting of 24 -105?

11-24....What do you use it for?   Why is it great?
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Craig Lamson on November 04, 2018, 08:18:33 am
TWO, good point, I'm having to ask so that probably means I'm ok with 24 wide angle on 24 to 105; sorry I have 24-105 not 24 to 70.

Craig, please expand:  "The 16-35 is not much of an upgrade from the 24-70"

For wide angle portraits, when at 16 or 17 setting on the 16-35,  not much better or worth spending 1-2k  that when on 24 setting of 24 -105?

11-24....What do you use it for?   Why is it great?

16mm is just not enough of a "wide" upgrade in my opinion.  The 11-24...thats "wide".

My professional needs are specialized, I shoto confined space interiors, but I also use this lens for fun.  Its very sharp, the disgortion is easily correctable and 11mm gives some really in terestiong viewpoints.  Its not for everyone I suppose and its big and heavy, and cannot accept front filters.  Thats said I made many hunderds of thousands of dollars shootimg with the original Sigma 12-24 lens. Not a perfect lens but quite capable if you get ahold of a good sample.  I have no experience with the new versions but I suspect they too are decent.




Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 04, 2018, 06:03:05 pm
Great post Craig!

You saw earlier post by, .... member said he thinks for people/ portraits, 24 suffices in that as you get wider, people get  smaller. Do you disagree?

How do you correct distortion easily?

You lens is rectilinear?

Can you please send link of it? Is this your lens?  https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1282158-REG/sigma_205954_500mm_f_4_dg_os.html

No front end filter, why is that, don't get that.. What miss mostly.. protection?

Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Craig Lamson on November 04, 2018, 07:23:20 pm
Great post Craig!

You saw earlier post by, .... member said he thinks for people/ portraits, 24 suffices in that as you get wider, people get  smaller. Do you disagree?

How do you correct distortion easily?

You lens is rectilinear?

Can you please send link of it? Is this your lens?  https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1282158-REG/sigma_205954_500mm_f_4_dg_os.html

No front end filter, why is that, don't get that.. What miss mostly.. protection?

Iím using the Canon 11-24.  The front element is to big to accept a filter.  Quite frankly I donít use a up fliter on any lenses.  Distortion is corrected in either Capture One or photoshop.   I canít imaging using 11mm for a portrait but who knows.

Thatís the new version of the Sigma 12-24
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 04, 2018, 09:45:43 pm
OK GREG, So you used to use Sigma and then decided to spend double and buy Canon?  How was/ or is Sigma vs Canon.

Darn, that is the most expensive option in discussion.

I do love those 2 images.. could be part of an environmental portrait story?  Sadly it seems this thread or forum does not attract too many portrait photographers. so I still out of luck on my last important question:

"'Im actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you agree for that need maybe not really worth it to spend another 1k to just have a lens that goes 16/17 when I have 24, and portraits inside??"
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 04, 2018, 09:56:23 pm
PS Airplane and Motor Home? Those are at 11 on the Canon Lens?  (and would quality of a Sigma be the same?)
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on November 05, 2018, 11:04:30 am
I use the 16-35 f4 on the 5DSR. I have both it and the 11-24 f4 and the quality of the 16-35 f4 hangs right with it for stopped down landscape work. If you don't need the extra width then it is a no brainer, it is much lighter than the 11-24 f4 and a small fraction of the cost.

I tried a friends 17-40 on the 5DSR and I was not happy with the results. The sharpness, especially in the corners just wasn't there for me.

I almost never work hand held so someone else will have to help you on the IS question...

For the 5d2 it is probably a closer decision, as that camera is less demanding of lens quality. But it you want to upgrade at some point, the 16-35 f4 will work wonderfully on the higher MP cameras, and so for me it is a better long term investment.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 05, 2018, 01:35:42 pm
thanks Guido, good post. Ok leaning to Canon 16-35 f4 , is I get another lens.

But, man, no people shooters here!

Again, redundant, no good answer to this yet: ""'Im actually leaning towards just not buying now and using the 24 end of my 24 to 105 for these fine art environmental portraits. Do you agree for that need maybe not really worth it to spend another 1k to just have a lens that goes 16/17 when I have 24, and portraits inside??"

Also Sigma?..
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: mcbroomf on November 05, 2018, 03:05:37 pm
If you're not sure then an option often recommended is to rent one or more of the lenses, for a trip or a project etc.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on November 05, 2018, 03:54:53 pm


But, man, no people shooters here!


That's why the site isn't called Luminous Peoplescape
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Craig Lamson on November 05, 2018, 04:17:13 pm
If you're not sure then an option often recommended is to rent one or more of the lenses, for a trip or a project etc.

Good advice.  I rented the 11-24 from Lensrentals and when I found I was happy with it I bought the copy I had from them at a nice discount from new.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 05, 2018, 08:00:46 pm
Guido, in the 10 -15 years I've been on forum, I've never connected Landscape to Landscape shooting. I just though was cool name for a forum! Now I know!
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Jack Hogan on November 06, 2018, 03:34:59 am
Yet another non-people shooter here Kevs, but wouldn't something as wide as 16mm make head-shots all distorted on FF?  Like huge noses and such?

Jack
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 06, 2018, 02:11:32 pm
As I've been saying throughout the thread environmental portraits not headshots.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on November 06, 2018, 03:57:06 pm
The Canon store has them refurbished...

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/ef-16-35mm-f4l-is-usm-refurbished
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on November 07, 2018, 12:18:10 pm
thanks Guido, now torn between that on and 11 - 24!   people but could be cool stuff, should rent probably...
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: HywelPhillips on November 07, 2018, 05:21:48 pm
Can I ask a follow-up question to everyone?

What ultra-wide for astro-landscapes, in Canon or Sony mount?

I've been using the Samyang/Rokinon 12 mm f/2.8 fisheye and the 14mm f/2.8 (actually the T/3.1 manual focus cine version but same optics, just different housing).

They're fine, but the distortion of the fisheye is pretty extreme and the 14mm isn't really quite wide enough for my tastes. Plus it is manual focus only, and the moustache distortion makes it unsuitable for general use. So I carry these two lenses as single-purpose tools for astro shots. 

I wondered about the wide end of a more general-pupose lens with autofocus. On a hiking trip I'd rather not take too many single-purpose lenses!

Has anyone got experience of the Canon 11-24mm f/4 or Sony 12-24mm f/4 zooms for astrolandscape? The Canon's probably too heavy but the Sony's appealing.

Or the 12mm Laowa f/2.8 D-zero?

How about the 14mm f/1.8 Sigma Art?

I'm mainly shooting mountain-scapes with the Milky way, and the Aurora.

Lonely Speck just reviewed the Laowa 15mm f/2 Zero-D and liked it, but I was more interested in the 12mm/f2.8. Or even potentially the forthcoming 10-18mm zoom: that extra width is very appealing even with loss of a stop and a bit of light. 130 degrees field of view rectilinear might be pretty cool. Anyone have any recommendations?


Cheers, Hywel Phillips


 
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: HywelPhillips on November 07, 2018, 05:59:16 pm
(These are the sorts of shots I've been taking)...

Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on November 08, 2018, 08:13:24 pm
A lightly used one over here

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1566630
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on December 06, 2018, 09:42:43 pm
Finals question guys, please vote; yeah nay.


Would you buy the 16-35 Canon f/4 from Canon refurbished $879.00 over the BH new at $999?


Thanks.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: guido on December 07, 2018, 07:00:04 pm
I have purchased multiple refurbished lenses and a body from the Canon store. Nice savings and the quality has been spot on. I'd have no concerns going that way...
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on December 07, 2018, 08:42:30 pm
Thanks Guido.. you know I'm 100% sure it's like new.. but as I look at photo of 16-35 on canon site,  I realize that it could have a 'worn' look, so maybe I'm shallow, but I'm thinking that $120 more is worth it to have it look shiny new.

Leaning to the 16-35, though the 11- 24 is still in my head, pity it's overpriced. (even the Sigma is  60% more )

The 17-40 is so cheap now, BH $600, but nobody here or anywhere, seems to think it's a good lens.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on December 12, 2018, 03:57:21 pm
Went in to camera store yesterday tested Canon 11-24, very impressive. $2700

Other ideas: fixed 14 $1900?,   and Canon does have these cheaper 10 to 22 etc, not sure they would even mount on a 5d, and I'm sure quality lousy on those..?

And then Sigma art 12mm to.. 24-- have not tested yet...

This is what it's narrowing down to...

Agree: once you see 11mm, you probably wont buy even the 16 to 35mm.   (and Canon 11 to 24, did not even exist in my older Canon lens booklet, when did they invent it?)

Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: NancyP on December 13, 2018, 05:48:38 pm
Ultra-wide isn't for everyone. A cheap way to dip into it is the FF-coverage Samyang/Rokinon 14 mm f/2.8, ask around if anyone has it and borrow it. It isn't for architecture due to the funky mustache distortion, but for learning if you like composing  using 14 mm on FF - perfectly fine. USD $100.00 to $200.00 used, $330.00 new list. Yes, there's a lot of sample variation, yes there's tons of vignetting wide open. If you aren't thrilled with 14 mm, you just saved yourself a fair bit of money by buying a 16 - 35 mm instead of the 11 - 24 mm Canon lens. Plus, the 16-35s are considerably lighter than the 11 - 24.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Geods on December 16, 2018, 11:33:16 am
If you haven't tried stitching yet, you should. Stitching is not just for making panorama-type photographs. With a higher resolution image, one can not only correct perspective but crop and edit while comfortably, in front of the computer. I have found the results clearly superior to single frame shots. In the old days, I used to lug around an 8x10 camera, holders, heavy tripod, etc. Now, I can carry such a camera in my pocket and the results are better.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: Rhossydd on December 17, 2018, 06:23:22 am
It isn't for architecture due to the funky mustache distortion,
Instantly corrected in Lightroom and ACR with a lens profile.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: NancyP on December 17, 2018, 10:08:40 am
I forgot - yes someone did make an Adobe lens profile for it.
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on December 17, 2018, 01:50:59 pm
I cannot stitch, I shoot people.

The low end stuff does not interest me. Here is where I'm at now:

The sweet spot for creativity are these 11-24, 12-24 lenses.

Just read lots of the top reviews from several top lens comparison sites... , and the verdict is that the Canon 11-24 is just a hair better, but not that much from Sigma 12-24. Certainly not worth almost double the price. (in fact apart from sharpness being a tad better, ( and being one mm wider -- 11 over 12--, the Sigma does better with distortion, vignetting, and chromatic chromatic aberration. 

Personally, I never buy 3rd party and go with Canon, but this may be the case there someone has come up with something 95% as good at almost 1/2 price.

Any reason to hold off buying now? (would Sigma come down in price or release a newer version after Jan 1?)

Any arguments for paying almost double for Canon?
Title: Re: Wide Angle recommendation
Post by: kevs on January 23, 2019, 12:42:04 pm
Update for all: I ordered new from BH the Sigma 12-24. Back ordered a month. Then a month later it was back ordered another 2 more months.

Then I called Sigma, annoyed,  I checked ebay, and then started going back to research comparisons to the Canon 11-24...which is actually twice as sharp and twice as good... did a lot of reading.

In short, the Gods must have been speaking, I cancelled the Sigma and ordered the Canon 11-24 new yesterday.

( I did bid on a near mint Canon 11-24 on ebay for $2100 three days ago, and lost, just barely)... Of course everyone who sells a lens there seems to say it was only used 1 -10 times... ...)  That's another interesting discussion, buying used things on ebay (even "near mint),  just to save 15% for something you can get new...