Which wide angle for EOS 550D?

[videonastie]

I am looking to purchase a good wide angle lens & the two I had in mind are the....

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM

Now both get good reviews, but the Canon is nearly £300 more than the Sigma, is this lens really worth it & what would people recommend?

 

[eduk]

I am looking to purchase a good wide angle lens & the two I had in mind are the....

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM

Now both get good reviews, but the Canon is nearly £300 more than the Sigma, is this lens really worth it & what would people recommend?

I like my Sigma. Have you also considered the excellent Sigma 8-16mm?

 

[videonastie]

I like my Sigma. Have you also considered the excellent Sigma 8-16mm?

I haven't but will check it out.

 

[shotokan101]

What about Tokina ? - good reputation and they do both an 11-16mm F2.8 and a 12-24mm F4 ?

Jim

 

[RobDickinson]

I have a sigma 10-20f4.5-5.6

Its OK. I'm not as happy with it now I have a 7D and a 17-55. Seems to lack (corner)sharpness and a certain pop vs the canon.

I will sell it on and probably buy an 8-16 or tokina 11-16f2.8 .

One reason not to buy the 8-16 is its round front element preventing normal filter use.

 

[videonastie]

I'm pushing towards the Canon, but it is bloody expensive...

HTC Desire using AVForums

 

[weetsie]

either of the tokina lenses would be my choice, just such a shame they dont have FTM.

 

[videonastie]

either of the tokina lenses would be my choice, just such a shame they dont have FTM.

The Tokina looks good.

What's FTM?

HTC Desire using AVForums

 

[RobDickinson]

full time manual focus, something I dont think you really need on an UWA 99% of the time.

 

[HelloMoto]

If you can afford it get the Canon.

 

[weetsie]

full time manual focus, something I dont think you really need on an UWA 99% of the time.

depends what you use it for and i agree for most people its not important but FTM is the main feature i would want and i cant aford a 10-22.

 

[senu]

The Tokina are affordable and fine FTMm is fine but by no means absolutely essesntial

 

[videonastie]

Would the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM be fine for the 550D?

I know its not as wide as the Tokina/Canon, but it gets superb reviews...

HTC Desire using AVForums

 

[Dr O]

Would the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM be fine for the 550D?

I know its not as wide as the Tokina/Canon, but it gets superb reviews...

HTC Desire using AVForums

While the 17-40 is a pretty good lens it's not wide on a crop camera like the 550D.

So, it depends if you want a wide angle lens or not.

UWA lens choice is Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20 in that order for a canon crop. Not much more can be said.

Or buy a 5D and abandon EF-S lenses

 

[videonastie]

While the 17-40 is a pretty good lens it's not wide on a crop camera like the 550D.

So, it depends if you want a wide angle lens or not.

UWA lens choice is Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20 in that order for a canon crop. Not much more can be said.

Or buy a 5D and abandon EF-S lenses

Thanks for the info bud.

HTC Desire using AVForums

 

[RobDickinson]

17-40L is an ace lens on full frame.

It makes a good lens on crop as a 'walkabout' but realy doesnt make sense when you compare it to the 17-55f2.8IS, unless you need weathersealing.

 

[senu]

17-40L is an ace lens on full frame.

It makes a good lens on crop as a 'walkabout' but realy doesnt make sense when you compare it to the 17-55f2.8IS, unless you need weathersealing.

Correct for for decent wide angle though a UWA is best
Saying that much as I love my Tokina 12-24 it get less use than the 17-50 walkabout

 

[videonastie]

Do any of these wide angle lenses provide good portrait quality to that of the Canon 50mm?

HTC Desire using AVForums

 

[eduk]

Do any of these wide angle lenses provide good portrait quality to that of the Canon 50mm?

HTC Desire using AVForums

Not the 10-20mm ones, no. Far too wide.

 

[RobDickinson]

Portraits with a 10-20ish lens are quite interesting, but of very limited use.
They distort a lot, exaggerate perspective massively, even at f2.8 your not looking at that shallow a DOF.

There probably isnt a lens type more poorly suited to portraits.

 

[videonastie]

Thanks for everyone's info, but after all this research I'm thinking about purchasing a walk-around instead, as the price of the Canon limits me to just wide angle & my budget isn't limitless..

I've got my eye on the Canon 24-105mm. I know this lens is predominately made for full frame DSLR's, but I have read some excellent reviews about this camera when connected to any Canon camera??

 

[senu]

Thanks for everyone's info, but after all this research I'm thinking about purchasing a walk-around instead, as the price of the Canon limits me to just wide angle & my budget isn't limitless..

I've got my eye on the Canon 24-105mm. I know this lens is predominately made for full frame DSLR's, but I have read some excellent reviews about this camera when connected to any Canon camera??

If you can live with 24mm as the widest focal length it is very well sorted L lens but not universally loved by APS-C users
What do you have ?
The Canon 15-85 is a walkabout.. not cheap
The Canon 18-135 is a walkabout , not unworthy but wont give any of the better lenses a scare
The 17-55 is probably the best EF-S Canon walkabout but it is costly, the Tamron and Sigma alternatives are well worth a look

 

[videonastie]

If you can live with 24mm as the widest focal length it is very well sorted L lens but not universally loved by APS-C users
What do you have ?
The Canon 15-85 is a walkabout.. not cheap
The Canon 18-135 is a walkabout , not unworthy but wont give any of the better lenses a scare
The 17-55 is probably the best EF-S Canon walkabout but it is costly, the Tamron and Sigma alternatives are well worth a look

I've just sold my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di, its a good lens, but I didn't feel I was getting that quality I wanted. When reading so many reviews, it can mess with your mind

 

[senu]

I've just sold my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR Di, its a good lens, but I didn't feel I was getting that quality I wanted. When reading so many reviews, it can mess with your mind

Although you can do better than the Tamron in absolute terms , Im not sure that you will get better PQ that correlates to cost difference among comparable lenses
I think the Tamron is at least averagely 90% optically as good as the Canon 17-55 which is twice its cost, and in some focal lengths nearer 100% stopped down

To be sure Unlike the Canon it doesn't have "L"glass, IS , USM ( hunts less and is fast and quiet) and build is better on the Canon but image "quality" Im struggling to imagine a "chalk and cheese" "difference" TBH
Its worth being a bit circumspect with with reviews , Context import and everything can be bettered..but what does that mean in the real world?

 

[videonastie]

Although you can do better than the Tamron in absolute terms , Im not sure that you will get better PQ that correlates to cost difference among comparable lenses
I think the Tamron is at least averagely 90% optically as good as the Canon 17-55 which is twice its cost, and in some focal lengths nearer 100% stopped down

To be sure Unlike the Canon it doesn't have "L"glass, IS , USM ( hunts less and is fast and quiet) and build is better on the Canon but image "quality" Im struggling to imagine a "chalk and cheese" "difference" TBH
Its worth being a bit circumspect with with reviews , Context import and everything can be bettered..but what does that mean in the real world?

Thanks for your opinion, much appreciated.

I'm gonna have a think.