Wide Angle Lens

Discussion in 'Photography Forums' started by Jarroda, Jan 4, 2012.

  1. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Afternoon all, now Christmas is over I'm starting my research into the first additional lens for the new camera. I know I will use wide-angle a lot more than telephoto, so this is where I'm starting. This lens will be aimed at indoor shots, outdoor, landscape and as a great general all-rounder. It will be mounted on a Sony A65 and I don't want to buy a lens that suffers from distortion, eg "fisheye".

    Having seen many photo's taken on the Sigma 10-20mm and read a few reviews this seems like a good starting place.

    Are there any other options you'd recommend ? And why do there seem to be no very wide angle prime lenses ?
     
  2. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    10-20, 10-24, 11-16, 8-16.
     
  3. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Not sure where the 11-16 fits in but the rest all seem to be Sigmas. With all the Prime Sigma Lenses anything below 20mm seems to be of a fisheye design, which is a shame but sure there's a good reason.

    The 8-16 seems to be substantially more expensive than the 10-20 and also offers only F4.5 as opposed to F3.5 which I would believe makes a reasonably appreciable difference in low light.?

    10-24 again goes to F4.5, is more expensive and moves further into a range I can already cover with the stock lens.
     
  4. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    10-24 Tamron or Nikon
    11-16 Tokina
    Rest Sigma.

    I wouldnt use a wide angle in low light, mostly intended for smaller apertures, F8 onwards. Youre pretty much always going to have overlap unless you choose standard lenses, its one of those things.

    The 8-16 also offers 2mm wider coverage which at this focal range is a lot. 10-24 offers a slightly more versatile lens.

    With that thinking you could say Ill go for a 10-20 because theres less overlap, well going for a 10-24 may mean less switching of lenses.
     
  5. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    BTW 10-20 comes in 2 different versions, not just the 3.5.
     
  6. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    True, the F4 version seems to be £100 cheaper (list price), I haven't compared both fully yet, but will later. Because of the certain low-light usage both indoors and out I'm drawn to the F3.5 if the difference is appreciable.

    Any recommendations for places to purchase lenses from / is there still the same issues over "import" lenses that exists with cameras ?
     
  7. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Id go Tokina 11-16 if youre concerned about low light.
     
  8. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Ok - this potentially spoils the party here then as it would definitely get used lots in low light indoors and outside on an evening. If it's not useful for that then it's a no-go.

    Any other suggestions ?
     
  9. eddiewood

    eddiewood
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,722
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,145
    Use a tripod, buildings aren't very fast runners.
     
  10. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Tokina 11-16mm its F2.8

    Ultrawides distort people heavily, they arent meant for portraiture if thats the plan, if its meant for indoor architecture, youll use a tripod anyway for DOF so F3.5 or F4.5 will make no difference.

    May need a rethink about what youd like to achieve.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2012
  11. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    This is true, and a possibility, but..

    I'm just not that serious a photographer that I'm going to be carrying a Tripod around everywhere with me, especially on holiday at night. There are definitely times and places I will have it, but the majority of the time I want tech that helps me, not needing to hire a sherpa to follow along :smashin:
     
  12. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Monopod

    Use a ultrawide during the day and a Sigma 30mm 1.4 at night. Done.
     
  13. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Perhaps I do need that rethink. I've always used cameras indoors and wished for a greater field of vision than I generally have, eg try taking pictures of your new bathroom when it's an average size.

    And when I was in Vegas a few weeks back I was desperate for a great quality camera to take pictures at night and a wide enough angle to get more into any video footage I took too. All this would not normally involve a tripod.

    I wasn't thinking of using this as a primary lens for use at parties, but if it makes people look 12ft wide (non Americans) then I obviously need to be aware of the limitations.

    Thanks guys.


    Does the above help ?
     
  14. eddiewood

    eddiewood
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,722
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,145
    What is it that you'll be photographing?
     
  15. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    There's a grand gone - :eek:
     
  16. eddiewood

    eddiewood
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,722
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,145
    Sounds like you'll be getting the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8.

    I plan my night time shooting and carry a monopod with my Sigma 10-20mm, the Manfrotto 682B one with legs, doubles as a tripod for shots that need a very slow shutter.

    Manfrotto 682B Self Standing Monopod: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

    *however I have yet to go out with my shiny new A77 and try multi-shot NR.
     
  17. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Good lenses are expensive. ;)
     
  18. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    OR

    Sigma 10-20 used = £250
    New 50mm 1.8 = £70 - £100
     
  19. Delvey

    Delvey
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,835
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +2,692
    Or abit wider the 35mm 1.8 can be had at Argos for £120 if you can find one in stock. I find the 50mm a little long indoors
     
  20. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Another good suggestion.
     
  21. Bl4ckGryph0n

    Bl4ckGryph0n
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2003
    Messages:
    38,384
    Products Owned:
    10
    Products Wanted:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    ::1/128
    Ratings:
    +12,286
    I like my 8-16 those 2mm extra really does make it WIIIIDDDDDEEE :) But not really a portrait lens or for parties tbh...And I do have the 30mm 1.4 as well and that is brilliant in low light and for people.
     
  22. eddiewood

    eddiewood
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,722
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,145
    At around that I'd be tempted to sell him my 10-20 and put it toward the 8-16mm. :D
     
  23. Johnmcl7

    Johnmcl7
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,301
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Invermess
    Ratings:
    +1,414
    I don't find ultrawides too bad in low light as the shorter focal lengths give you a bit more depth of field and also make it easier to hand hold at lower shutter speeds although it's not a lens I'd use specifically for low light as a wide aperture prime is definitely the way to go there if the focal length is suitable. The extreme distortion can be a challenge to work with as it can produce some very strange effects which is not very flattering when people are caught up in the distortion. In general I really enjoy using wide angle lenses as they give such a unique view but the usefulness varies from person to person.

    John
     
  24. Liquid101

    Liquid101
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,913
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Aberystwyth
    Ratings:
    +2,842
    Something else to throw into the mix.

    Sigma 20mm f/1.8

    Not very wide on a crop sensor, but excellent in low light and little distortion. Very close focusing as well.
     
  25. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Lots to think about, thanks everyone for the input, so the choices seem to come down to (in no order at all) :-

    • Sigma 10-20 F3.5
    • Tokina 11-16 F2.8
    • 50mm 1.8 Prime
    • 30mm 1.8 Prime
    I'm not in any desperate rush to buy anything straight away so I can play a little more with the stock lens and see what I then fancy adding.

    The Prime lenses are very tempting due to the much lower F rating, weight saving, space saving and cost. Of those listed the 30mm seems more logical.

    Are there any good places I look to purchase Lenses from ? I also have family visiting the US in a few weeks so that may be useful if I opted to buy something expensive.
     
  26. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
    Only the 35mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 prime are cheap, the 20 & 30mm Sigma are v expensive.

    For what you want Id still go for the Tokina.
     
  27. Liquid101

    Liquid101
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,913
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Aberystwyth
    Ratings:
    +2,842
    Prime lenses are almost always sharper, give less distortion and vignetting when compared to zoom lenses. You'll also get a faster lens for your money.

    Don't be afraid to by them used either - with less moving parts, they are less likely to go wrong. I bought my 20mm Sigma 1.8 EX DG for £125 and a Nikon 300mm IF ED 4.5 for £135 - both are pin sharp and perform well.
     
  28. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Where is the main places you buy used lenses from, eBay ?

    The Wide Zoom lenses are more expensive but offer me range that I simply don't have with the stock lens and that's very attractive. The Prime lenses fit within the range I already have, but would offer better quality and the capability to shoot in far lower light.

    In regards to the F ranges. I'm assuming the difference in low light (eg hand-held night shooting) capability between F4.5 (present) and F2.8 (Tokina) is very large ? The move to a F1.8 Prime I would then assume makes an appreciable difference again ? But would I appreciate the difference between F1.8 and the more expensive F1.4's ?
     
  29. twist

    twist
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,992
  30. Jarroda

    Jarroda
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +86
    Interesting post, but I have to admit that the more I read, the more glad I was for the AUTO setting :thumbsup:

    What it doesn't describe / show is the actual difference in a photograph taken in low light on different stops and with a fixed (and sensible) shutter speed and a given ISO. Certainly a good idea to play with my present lens and see the differences. A task for the weekend I think.

    What it does do is confuse me even more by pointing out that the lenses operate best at mid exposures and that by using a low F setting I'll probably have DoF issues too (although I assume for landscape / objects not near to the camera this is less of an issue). :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page

Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice