Going Super Wide - Canon

[Revan]

After absorbing and really enjoying WDWFigments trip report I'm looking to pick up an ultrawide zoom or fisheye for my Canon 7D. I know due to the crop factor that a fisheye won't really be a fisheye - but I'm interested in opinions.

WDWFigment recommended the Rokinon 8mm Fisheye, but mentioned that it was manual focus only - does any one have experience with this lens on a Canon mount?

I'm also trying to decide between Canon's 10-22mm 3.5-4.5 or Canon's EF-s 17-55mm. I'm leaning towards the 10-22, with a 1.6 crop it is an effective 16-35.

Thanks!

[ChiSoxKeith]

I've been leaning towards the Canon 10-22 as well. www.lensrentals.com has a nice review of several Canon compatible Super Wide lenses.

[Revan]

Great link - those short bullet points do help crystallize my thinking about the 10-22, the link to a more in depth review is great too.

[ChiSoxKeith]

No problem. Glad you found it helpful. I have not rented from Lensrentals.com yet but I do find their reviews helpful.

[Code]

Actually the crop factor isn't going to make a fisheye not be a fisheye.. the 8mm Rokinon/Samyang/Bower/Pro-Optic fisheye gives a true 180° diagonal view (corner to corner) because it is made for APS-C size sensors (well, slightly less than 180° on Canon because of 1.6x crop rather than 1.5x, but it's an insignificant difference).

Manual focus is very easy to manage because the depth of field is huge, even at widest aperture. Take advantage of the hyperfocal distance of 3.3ft (set focus there using distance scale on lens) and everything from 1.6 ft to infinity is in focus. You don't ever have to change it unless you're focusing pretty close.

No experience with Canon myself but I have it for Sony and am very happy with it, it's a great deal for the price.

As for 10-22 vs 17-55.. 17mm is wide, but definitly not ultra wide. If you aspire to get shots like Tom's, you'll definitely need <17.

Good luck with your choice!

[ChiSoxKeith]

Thanks for the tip.

Was looking around online and the lens isn't that expensive. $319 for new ones on ebay (Samyang branded model). Will have to add this to my want list. Still want that 10-22 for some UWA shots.

[Code]

Thanks for the tip.

Was looking around online and the lens isn't that expensive. $319 for new ones on ebay (Samyang branded model). Will have to add this to my want list. Still want that 10-22 for some UWA shots.

It can be had for much cheaper.. the Rokinon on Amazon is $263 currently.

[zackiedawg]

I'd also recommend at least taking a look at the third-party options for UWA lenses, as they are very price-competitive and arguably as good or better in image quality - Sigma's 10-20mm, Tamron's 10-24mm, and Tokina's 11-16mm are all worth a look too, and are available in some cases for at or under $500.

[Revan]

Thanks - Sigma's offering looks interesting - I've used their 17-35 before.

[Shutterbug]

I have rented the Tokina 11-16 2.8 and the fisheye 10-17.

I like both lenses, both are built very well IMO. If had to choose one or the other I probably would go for the ultrawide. Thing the Tokina ultrawide is hard to keep in stock anywhere that has it for a decent price $599

[C&B Young]

I've got the Tokina 11-16 and love it. UWA shooting definitely takes some getting used to, which I still am. And speaking of getting used to new things, our new Rokinon 8mm fisheye arrived in the mail today! :) Shooting with a manual lens should be a challenge, but like Code said almost everything appears to be in focus once you get up to around f/8 so that's one less thing to worry about!

[MarkBarbieri]

Sigma has a 10mm fisheye (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/535763-USA/Sigma_477_101_10mm_f_2_8_EX_DC.html) designed for APS-C cameras and an 8mm fisheye (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/440665-REG/Sigma_485101_8mm_f_3_5_EX_DG.html) that can be used as a circular fisheye on FF cameras or a very wide fisheye on APS-C cameras. Canon is coming out with an 8mm-15mm zoom fisheye (http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=3507). It is rumored to start shipping this month. All three of these lenses are relatively expensive.

Canon posted a pretty neat video (http://web.canon.jp/imaging/ef/samples/ef8-15_f4l_f_usm/) shot with the fisheye zoom.

[boBQuincy]

Canon's 10-22 works well as an ultra wide angle, here is an image of a familiar subject at 10mm:

http://www.suzieandbob.com/wdw/sep2009/torii_4391_2_3_fused.jpg

For wider than that the Rokinon is probably your best choice unless you have lots of $$$ and can get Canon's 8-15 (those are both fisheye, the 10-22 is not).

[Revan]

Great shot in Japan!

- I'm definitely leaning towards the 10-22 at this point, the 8-15 is just too expensive for the amount of use it would get - but the Rokinon seems really fun and the images I've seen look great

[zackiedawg]

If you've got the budget to spend on it, and are fairly committed to sticking with a Canon brand lens...it certainly looks like a decent lens. The Sigma 8-15mm looks quite neat, I agree - it is a bit pricey still. I'd still recommend considering the much cheaper Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24, especially if you're only going to use it a small overall percentage of time - it'll save you at least a few hundred dollars over the Canon, and output can be quite good too. Feel free to browse my gallery of stuff from my Tamron 10-24mm, a lens that gets a pretty good workout from me:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg/tamron_1024mm_f3545_lens

Including a pretty fair bit at Disney!

[WDWFigment]

I use the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, Sigma 8-16, and Rokinon 8mm fisheye. I love them all. I've also used the Tokina 10-17 fisheye, but I wasn't overwhelmed by that.

[Revan]

Feel free to browse my gallery of stuff from my Tamron 10-24mm, a lens that gets a pretty good workout from me:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg/tamron_1024mm_f3545_lens

Including a pretty fair bit at Disney!

Excellent stuff - really nice post-processing as well. Thanks!

[PrincessInOz]

Piggy-backing on this thread....

I just needed to put some thoughts down and seek some balance perspectives on a UWA lens (and other) for my Canon 550D (T2i).

By way of background, I currently have all Canon lenses - the two kit lenses (18 - 55 and 55 - 250), the 17 - 55 f/2.8 and the 50 f/1.8.

A friend of mine loaned me a Tamron 10 - 24 mm UWA and I played with it over the Christmas break. So, I've figured this is going to be a range that I could work with and would want to take pictures of.

Until 2 days ago, I was definitely purchasing the Tokina 11 - 16 mm f/2.8. The decision was based on the constant aperture and the seemingly rave reviews for this lens.
(The alternative lens to this was the Canon 10 - 22 mm f/3.5 - 4.6; wider range and also seemingly rave reviews.)

I was planning on purchasing the Tokina lens as I am heading to California in a couple of days. I started to contact a number of specialty camera shops and it turns out it is a difficult lens to source. I know it is silly but I have a preference to buy over the counter cf on-line. I also know that I can buy the Tokina on-line from B&H or Amazon.
Problem is - I have to factor warranty into the decision. I'm seeing a few reviews on-line where a few individuals have had issues with the lens. Not a lot of reviews like this; but enough for me to re-think my decision. I'm only going to be in the US for 10 days; so I don't have the luxury of sending back a lens if it is faulty out of the box. If it is faulty down the track, then I've been looking at the international warranty side of things. Tokina warranty is based in the US and there is an Australian dealer that I would need to go through....but there is no guarantees that they would honour the warranty and from what I can figure out, they would send the lens back to the US for fixing and the shipping cost would be on me. If I have to buy a Mack International Warranty for the lens, it would defeat the purpose of buying the lens in the US.

Canon warranty on lenses is international; and the Canon regional office is in Melbourne. As I would have purchased the lens from a reputable Canon dealer in the US, the warranty would be honoured.

I also thought about what I would use the UWA for - and I would love to say that I was using it at night in Disney parks; but after this trip, I'm starting to think that I might need to head back towards Europe or Asia. So, chances are - I'd be using it around Oz and in Europe; predominantly daytime shots and if I were going to be doing night shots; I'd probably be setting up the tripod and using f-stops of > 11 anyway. I'm also not sure how much I'd be using the lens for indoor low-light shooting and have the 17 - 55 f/2.8 as an alternative; not UWA...but I can live with it.
I don't see myself or DH getting a full-frame camera in the medium term; so the EF-S rating of the Canon doesn't fuss me.

I also know that I can get the Canon lens from Samy's Camera shop in LA almost immediately on arrival. The alternative is to get the Canon at Keeble and Shuchat in Palo Alto when I get there at the weekend.

Price really isn't an issue - both lenses are currently retailing around the AU$1000 mark and even with the seemingly extra $$ on the Canon in the US, there is a savings there. The Canon does normally retail around AU$1200 but is currently on special for $1000. I believe that the Canon has a better second hand price in Australia (About $850) but that is hard to tell as I haven't yet seen the Tokina on the market second hand.

So, I'm starting to lean towards the Canon....but it is a hard thought to give up the constant aperture.

Here's my other dilemma....I had pretty much given up all thoughts on getting the Canon 70 - 200 mm f/2.8 IS (Mark II) based on price. This baby retails for at least $600 to $1000 more in Australia than in the US and the Mark II is already pricey in the US. Well, my lovely husband told me yesterday that if I really wanted this lens that I should probably think about getting it whilst in the US.

AARGH! He's NOT supposed to say that!
But I outgrew the 18 - 55 mm kit lens really, really quickly. I haven't yet outgrown the 55 - 250 mm kit lens but I reckon it will only be about 6 - 12 months before I'll want a faster lens in this range too. I'm thinking that I should wait on the telezoom and see if the price does fall?? Any thoughts on whether I'm dreaming or not?

What would you do? And are there any other options that I should consider?

princess::upsidedow

[Revan]

So I ended up purchasing the Canon 10-22 and love it. I'm not concerned about the aperture, I've been shooting at f5.6 to f8 in order to keep the whole scene in focus.

[ChiSoxKeith]

Awesome on getting the new lens.

Make sure you post some sample pics.