Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2012 · Really wide options?
  
 
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Really wide options?


OK I have a 17-40L and a 24tse, and at some point I would like wider.

Most of the time I'm happy to stitch, but sometimes, mostly seascapes (which I like to get really close to the water risking life limb and gear) & stars but sometimes other stuff it needs to be done in one frame too

I dont think the 16-35 is any wider in practical terms though I may give it a go one day.

All the other options have bulbous front elements ( sigy 12-24, 14L, SY14, TSE17mm) or stupid decisions (CZ 15mmf2.8 fixed lens hood).

I guess I could just get a sy 14mm and hack a filter holder (lee) see how I go, and correct the distortion but that reduces the effective FOV down a bit doesnt it?



Dec 09, 2012 at 02:30 AM
splathrop
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Really wide options?


What's wrong with a fixed lens hood?


Dec 09, 2012 at 03:54 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Really wide options?


Makes this tricky:

oh whats this? by robjdickinson, on Flickr

Given that 80-90% of the time I shoot really wide I want filters.



Dec 09, 2012 at 03:55 AM
anthonygh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Really wide options?


Depends a bit on your camera.....Sigma seem to have the market for value for money wide angles......personally....I think the 17 40L is as good as it gets....


Dec 09, 2012 at 04:03 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Really wide options?


Ah this is for a FF body rather than the M above..


Dec 09, 2012 at 04:05 AM
anthonygh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · Really wide options?


RobDickinson wrote:
Ah this is for a FF body rather than the M above..


My comment was FF directed.....


PS: I use mine on a 35mm film body.......great results....



Dec 09, 2012 at 04:19 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · Really wide options?


Yes. I have one (as I said), sometimes its wide enough, sometimes I use the 24tse for an effective 14mm shift stitched.

But sometimes I'd like wider



Dec 09, 2012 at 05:15 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Really wide options?


I'm assuming you need filters on the front as my Sig 12-24 has a rear filter holder.

I only ever use it well stopped down and with liveview to focus but my 12-24 is quite good and very wide without much distortion (although it does have the bulbous front element so probably won't help you)



Dec 09, 2012 at 10:23 AM
arthurb
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Really wide options?


When I started with my first digital slr, a 350d, I was stuck for an ultra wide. I bought a Sigma 15mm f2.8 fisheye. On the crop sensor camera it was the equivalent of about 24mm on FF. OK it has a good bit of fisheye distortion at the edges but this is correctable in Photoshop. This lens is very sharp and now I use FF I use it for its original purpose.


Dec 09, 2012 at 11:17 AM
Snopchenko
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · Really wide options?


Get a Sigma 12-24 or 14/2.8. I have the latter and it's a great lens.

























The 14mm focuses very close (18 cm), allowing for some interesting perspectives.



Dec 09, 2012 at 12:07 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



n0b0
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · Really wide options?


Rob, with stars you don't really need to use a filter right? So bulbous lens element shouldn't be a problem.

With the seascape though... You'd have to use one of those specialty panoramic cameras like the Linhof 617 Technorama that Ken Duncan uses if you really want ultra wide.

Personally I'm a fan of panoramic format. I think that compressing an ultra wide angle on a 3:2 aspect ratio makes it look rather strange and sometimes you just lose the feeling of wideness. Fisheye being the exception due to the distortion.



Dec 09, 2012 at 12:48 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · Really wide options?


RobDickinson wrote:
I guess I could just get a sy 14mm and hack a filter holder (lee) see how I go, and correct the distortion but that reduces the effective FOV down a bit doesnt it?


Correct what distortion? The Canon 14 mm L lens has 1.7% barrel distortion. Is that what you are referring to? Correcting it will have almost zero effect on the field of view.



Dec 09, 2012 at 04:00 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · Really wide options?


The Samyang 14 is a great UWA for the price. I have had the Zeiss 15f2.8 and returned it. I now own the 16-35 which I like better than the 17-40 it replaced. But the 17TSE is the lens to beat.

I find that shift is a very important feature for UWA, otherwise you end up pointing the lens skyward and end up with too much distortion. Even the Ziess distorts when pointed up. That's the real reason I returned it.

Building a filter holder is not that hard and is well documented. The 17TSE is one of the sharpest lenses I have owned.



Dec 09, 2012 at 04:26 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Really wide options?


ben egbert wrote:
I find that shift is a very important feature for UWA, otherwise you end up pointing the lens skyward and end up with too much distortion. Even the Ziess [15mm] distorts when pointed up. That's the real reason I returned it.


That kind of "distortion" is purely from perspective (distances and relative distances). In a derivative way it is a function of the focal length (though not strictly speaking). All 15mm lenses will "distort" the same amount when pointed up. That is why the correction for it in Photoshop is called "Perspective Transform".

The kind of distortion in the Samyang (thanks for cluing the "sy" code) is 5 % and is a real kind of distortion. It is severe barrel distortion that approaches fisheye characteristics. It is a function of choices made by the lens designer. It is present whatever direction the lens is pointed and is superimposed on (added to or multiplies) any perspective variations from pointing up.

The Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 has 3.3 % barrel distortion at 16 mm.

The Zeiss 15 mm has less; 3.0 % barrel distortion.

The Tokina 16-28 mm f/2.8 zoom has only 2.4 % barrel distortion at 16 mm (even less at other focal lengths), and is about as sharp as the Zeiss at f/4.0. The Zeiss has very good performance at f/2.8 and f/3.2. Even so, I'm very glad I got the Tokina. However, both are probably not wide enough for the OP.



Dec 09, 2012 at 05:33 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · Really wide options?


The 17TSE when shifted has no perspective distortion. It allows you to frame the shot with a perfectly leveled camera. It almost always needs to be shifted up for landscape work. I can't remember a time when I shifted down. Even then, 17mm landscapes tend to have too much height and need a 16x9 ratio.

Even if the distortion can be fixed in post, you don't see the shot until you get home and the fix degrades image quality.

The 16-35 is a pretty good dark night lens. But I use the 17 at f4 if I can stay at ISO800 or below. The 16-35 is also ok for shots into canyons where a level camera angle might work.




Dec 09, 2012 at 05:49 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Really wide options?


Monito wrote:
Correct what distortion? The Canon 14 mm L lens has 1.7% barrel distortion. Is that what you are referring to? Correcting it will have almost zero effect on the field of view.


I was talking about the samyang 14! its weird distortion...I think 70-80% of what I would shoot with this lens would be seascapes or other shots with identifiable horizons.

Yes for star shots I wont need filters. The 17tse is probably on my list but I would prefer wider, I can I guess shift stitch seascapes I do sometimes already anyhow.

I dont mind perspective distortion in seascapes either...(so long as the horizon ends up flat...)



Dec 09, 2012 at 07:24 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · Really wide options?


I recommend Canon's 14/2.8 II lens. Excellent lens. I have no experience with the Samyang 14/2.8 lens.


Dec 09, 2012 at 11:20 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · Really wide options?


Get a pano rail and you can stitch any lens by rotating around the entrance pupil.

Get a multi-row pano rig and you can make ultra-wide angle pictures with a telephoto lens.

Stitch with a lowly 12 MPixel camera like a 5D classic and you can out-resolve a 36.3 Mpx camera.

In any case, to properly stitch a shift lens, you have to anchor the lens to the tripod and shift the camera.



Dec 10, 2012 at 12:47 AM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Really wide options?


Yes. I stitch plenty already

This is for times I cant stitch.



Dec 10, 2012 at 12:50 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Really wide options?


Monito wrote:
Get a pano rail and you can stitch any lens by rotating around the entrance pupil.

Get a multi-row pano rig and you can make ultra-wide angle pictures with a telephoto lens.

Stitch with a lowly 12 MPixel camera like a 5D classic and you can out-resolve a 36.3 Mpx camera.

In any case, to properly stitch a shift lens, you have to anchor the lens to the tripod and shift the camera.


Many, many situations where stitching is not possible.



Dec 10, 2012 at 01:34 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password