Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

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

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?

  
 
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


I slum around with a 20-35 f2.8L - it's great.


Feb 26, 2013 at 03:05 AM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Since you have the 24-70 the Sigma 12-24 looks like a no brainer. It looks like one hell of a lens though I haven't used it (I have their 14mm and once upon a time owned a 15-30, but that was on APS-C).
Here's the TDP analysis of both, just flick it around to see how the lenses fare (they don't have the data for 12-24 II or the 14 though):
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=370&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=369&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
FWIW the 15-30 looks much better.

Edited by Guest on Feb 26, 2013 at 03:59 AM · View previous versions



Feb 26, 2013 at 03:52 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Snopchenko wrote:
Since you have the 24-70 the Sigma 12-24 looks like a no brainer. It looks like one hell of a lens though I haven't used it (I have their 14mm and once upon a time owned a 15-30, but that was on APS-C).


I find it quite a difficult lens to use (I have the Mk1)

You need to keep it bang upright and I have to use Liveview to focus really accurately and then stop down to around f11 but then it is quite remarkably wide and distortion free.



Feb 26, 2013 at 03:58 AM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


dhphoto wrote:
I find it quite a difficult lens to use (I have the Mk1)

You need to keep it bang upright and I have to use Liveview to focus really accurately and then stop down to around f11 but then it is quite remarkably wide and distortion free.

Yeah, but I thought that isn't a big deal for real estate and interior photography - you do all the shooting on a tripod and measure everything carefully, right? Though I've seen people use the 12-24 as their main reportage wideangle lens (including a guy from a major state news agency and a gal from the city's largest photo agency - she had a full frame camera to boot).



Feb 26, 2013 at 04:01 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Snopchenko wrote:
Yeah, but I thought that isn't a big deal for real estate and interior photography - you do all the shooting on a tripod and measure everything carefully, right? Though I've seen people use the 12-24 as their main reportage wideangle lens (including the guy from a major state news agency).


No big deal at all, I do interiors with it all the time and it really makes rooms look big, it would be ideal for showing off properties, but it needs slow deliberate use.

I find I'm not happy using it off a tripod as it's so slow and doesn't AF well. Maybe my copy isn't great but it needs stopping well down to be decently sharp. It's better at 17-24mm than it is at 12mm, but then it's 12mm on full frame!!

I wish I could post some samples but they're all subject to my clients' copyright



Feb 26, 2013 at 04:06 AM
Massimo Foti
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


trueimage wrote:
Can't LR4 fix most/all distortion now almost with 1 click? seems to do it to my eye...


Yes, but it's not free. The more you fix in post, the more resolution you loose.



Feb 26, 2013 at 01:23 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


RobDickinson wrote:
Canon TC's work on the TSE's

Though it will cause a slight drop in resolution and adds a bit of barrel distortion...from what I understand that distortion becomes more uneven with shifting. Whether or not that matters depends on the individual I suppose. Might not make much difference in most shots, but for architectural photos it might be discouraging.



Feb 26, 2013 at 01:43 PM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


I thought the TSEs and TCs were beyond the scope of this thread?
By the way, the Tokina 16-28 looks awesome from the TDP evaluation, better yet than the Sigma 15-30 (which looks better than the 12-24 mk. 1)



Feb 27, 2013 at 03:16 AM
Massimo Foti
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Snopchenko wrote:
By the way, the Tokina 16-28 looks awesome from the TDP evaluation


Roger Cicala has very positive comments on it too:
http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/wide-angle/tokina-16-28mm-f2.8-at-x-pro-fx-for-canon



Feb 27, 2013 at 06:36 AM
dgenx24
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


sigma 12-24 v1 has soft corners if you use it on full frame. might be copy to copy variation but mine wasn't really acceptable on 5dII doing landscape.
Now I use the second version of the sigma and pretty happy on 1.3 crop body.
but v1 was more distortion free



Feb 27, 2013 at 07:14 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


dgenx24 wrote:
sigma 12-24 v1 has soft corners if you use it on full frame. might be copy to copy variation but mine wasn't really acceptable on 5dII doing landscape.
Now I use the second version of the sigma and pretty happy on 1.3 crop body.
but v1 was more distortion free


Only at 12mm on mine and even that's not too bad if you are past f11. Still pretty amazing as it's 12mm, VERY wide

Once you are at 14mm to 24mm it's much better (on mine)



Feb 27, 2013 at 07:39 AM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


dgenx24 wrote:
sigma 12-24 v1 has soft corners if you use it on full frame. might be copy to copy variation but mine wasn't really acceptable on 5dII doing landscape.
Now I use the second version of the sigma and pretty happy on 1.3 crop body.
but v1 was more distortion free

It's a very different design. Pity that Photozone never got around to testing mk.1 on full frame - it would be interesting if the horrible field curvature they found on mk.2 (at 12mm) is also afflicting mk.1.



Feb 27, 2013 at 08:00 AM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


The Tokina has lower distortion than the 16-35 f/2.8 L (Mark I and II), Nikon 14-24, and Zeiss 21 mm. It is sharper than the Mark I and almost as sharp as the others. The 17-40 f/4 L never impressed me in my tests and doesn't compare as well in online tests, so I can't recommend it.

I'm very glad I got the Tokina.



Feb 27, 2013 at 09:55 AM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Snopchenko wrote:
It's a very different design. Pity that Photozone never got around to testing mk.1 on full frame - it would be interesting if the horrible field curvature they found on mk.2 (at 12mm) is also afflicting mk.1.

Do you mean field curvature or distortion? Field curvature issues relate to how lenses don't project images flat, causing the edges to not be in focus along with the center...this can be mitigated to some degree by stopping down to increase depth of field. But the 12-24 v2 is significantly better in the corners than the v1 at all apertures.

As far as distortion, that is the area that the v1 is better than the v2. The v2 exhibits a complex moustache type distortion. However, the distortion on the v2 is correctable in PTLens, and comparing corrected v2 images vs v1 images, the v2 comes out much better.



Feb 27, 2013 at 01:10 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Monito wrote:
The Tokina has lower distortion than the 16-35 f/2.8 L (Mark I and II), Nikon 14-24, and Zeiss 21 mm. It is sharper than the Mark I and almost as sharp as the others. The 17-40 f/4 L never impressed me in my tests and doesn't compare as well in online tests, so I can't recommend it.

I'm very glad I got the Tokina.



"Filter Size No front filter"

Utter fail for me.



Feb 27, 2013 at 02:21 PM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


artd wrote:
Do you mean field curvature or distortion? Field curvature issues relate to how lenses don't project images flat, causing the edges to not be in focus along with the center...this can be mitigated to some degree by stopping down to increase depth of field. But the 12-24 v2 is significantly better in the corners than the v1 at all apertures.

I did say it was about field curvature - that's what caused them to test the lens for two scenarios, one with taking FC into account and one just shooting away regardless of it (and thus wasting some potential sharpness). Needless to say, the results were not great in the second case, but they weren't stellar in the first one either. I believe that the same issue plagued the Samsung 16/2.4 lens as well. But it really only seemed an issue at 12mm. Whether the softness is only caused by field curvature is yet another question.

As far as distortion, that is the area that the v1 is better than the v2. The v2 exhibits a complex moustache type distortion. However, the distortion on the v2 is correctable in PTLens, and comparing corrected v2 images vs v1 images, the v2 comes out much better.

You do lose a bit of FOV this way, innit? I know the mk.2 is supposed to have a bit more distortion, but I'd much prefer a sharper image with a bit less FOV to a blurry wider one, any day.
Well, I'm happily married to the 16-35 AND the 14/2.8, but looks like the new concubine is set to arrive any day now!.. (courtesy of FM user rebelshooter) The 12-24 did look tempting when I was choosing an UWA, but the slowish aperture turned me off since my camera body can't do the fancy high ISO like the current cream of the crop.



Feb 27, 2013 at 03:58 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


artd wrote:
As far as distortion, that is the area that the v1 is better than the v2. The v2 exhibits a complex moustache type distortion. However, the distortion on the v2 is correctable in PTLens, and comparing corrected v2 images vs v1 images, the v2 comes out much better.

Snopchenko wrote:
You do lose a bit of FOV this way, innit? I know the mk.2 is supposed to have a bit more distortion, but I'd much prefer a sharper image with a bit less FOV to a blurry wider one, any day.

There is a slight loss in FOV, but I would guess it to be around 1mm. (After correcting and cropping an image shot at 12mm, it still has more FOV than an image shot at 14mm). So it's minimal in imapct. And of course, not all images necessarily need to be corrected, if there are not prominent staight lines running across composition you won't really notice the distortion.



Feb 27, 2013 at 04:08 PM
stan23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


I'd go the widest possible. There is a big difference between 16 and 17mm.


Feb 27, 2013 at 04:10 PM
Guest

Guest
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


The widest possible is 12mm. What the hell - go for the 12-24 II.


Feb 28, 2013 at 02:03 AM
lucas lumiere
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Wide Angle Zoom choice?


Used to have the 17-40. Then got the 16-35 I.

For your application 17-40 should be fine. It handles flare better than the 16-35 I.



Feb 28, 2013 at 02:11 AM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.