I have a 1D Mark III and I'm interested in getting a ultra wide angle zoom lens. I know the camera is not compatible with the Canon EF-S lenses so that limits me to the 16-35 as the widest option in a zoom by Canon. If price is not a consideration would you recommend the Canon 16-35, Sigma 12-24, Sigma 10-20, or Tokina 12-24? I'm not even certain if all of the off-brand lenses are compatible with the camera. Right now the widest zoom I have is the Canon 24-105L. I appreciate the help!
I'm not sure the Sigma 10-20 or the tonkina 12-24 is compatable with the 1D series. The 16-35mm Mark II, 17-40mm, or even the 14mm prime are some considerations.
I think you're limited to the Canon 16-35L and the Sigma 12-24...
the Sigma 10-20 and the Tokina 12-24 are designed for APS-C sized sensors and I think I've read of vignetting on the full frames and APS-H with both lenses
photoames wrote:
I have a 1D Mark III and I'm interested in getting a ultra wide angle zoom lens. I know the camera is not compatible with the Canon EF-S lenses so that limits me to the 16-35 as the widest option in a zoom by Canon. If price is not a consideration would you recommend the Canon 16-35, Sigma 12-24, Sigma 10-20, or Tokina 12-24? I'm not even certain if all of the off-brand lenses are compatible with the camera. Right now the widest zoom I have is the Canon 24-105L. I appreciate the help!
In your shoes I would pick between the 16-35 Mark II and the 17-40L. In fact, I ended up picking the 17-40L for use with my 5D (and previously with my film cameras).
The Sigma 12-24 has always intrigued me, but the widespread reports of sample variation and the fact that it doesn't allow the use of filters on the front has kept me away from it. There are certain landscape images for which I must use a circular polarizer or ND filter, and the 12-24 won't allow it. I could hang onto the 17-40L for those types of shots, but then it seems silly or wasteful to keep two ultrawide lenses on hand.
Photoames, apparently I misread your original question... I thought you were asking about a lens for use on a 1Ds Mk3 (full frame).
For the 1.25X crop factor of your 1D III, I might be tempted by the Sigma 12-24 over either of the Canon offerings. You have to understand, I'm really an ultrawide kind of guy, and 20 mm full-frame equivalent (what you'd get with the 16-35L) just wouldn't do it for me. Rather, I'm sure I could use it but I'd always be wanting something wider.
17 mm on full frame satisfies my ultrawide requirements, but to get the equivalent FOV on your camera would require something around 13-14 mm. That really only leaves the Sigma as a viable option for a zoom lens.
moondigger wrote:
17 mm on full frame satisfies my ultrawide requirements, but to get the equivalent FOV on your camera would require something around 13-14 mm. That really only leaves the Sigma as a viable option for a zoom lens.
Edward Castro wrote:
Not really, read my above suggestion.
Okay, let me revise my statement.
If you want to retain full functionality (autofocus, automatic aperture control, standard metering), then the Sigma 12-24 is the only viable option for a zoom lens. Clearly if you're willing to forgo those conveniences, a variety of other options are available.
Use the EF-S 10-22mm - Take out the "EF-S plug" (it comes out real easy). You can shoot 12mm-22mm with this setup. Do not go all the way to 10mm, as it can hit the mirror on a 1D Mark III. Results are pretty good. There are a few threads on here with some sample pix.
Thank you all for your advice. The canon 16-35 seems like a no brainer since it will also work on my full frame film camera. However, I agree with moondigger that it just doesn't seem wide enough when on the mark III. In any lens, I'd like it to retain it's full functionality. Recently, I read some reviews that weren't too favorable on the Sigma lenses. It seems like I'm going to get vignetting with any of those lenses until about the 12 mm mark, so there really is no sense in the Sigma 10-20 if that is going to happen. JMC_Design, do you know if the Tokina would also work on a full frame camera? What camera body are you using the lens on?
David, I had no idea that the canon 10-22 could be modified! Thanks for alerting me to that option. Have you done it? I found this link http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=361877 and it shows them replacing the back baffle with one from an EF lens to keep out the dust. Seems like a good solution since I'll be in the 12 mm range like all the other lenses without vignetting. Plus, it's a Canon lens and it could always be undone if I wanted to sell it! That is really something to consider...
The accidentally smacking the mirror seems a bit disconcerting. Seems like a really cool mod though, but on the field I lug around 2 bodies, and last thing I want to do is accidentally plop it at 10mm =(
I believe the 11-16 works on a full frame without vignetting @ 15-16mm.
I also use the 16-35 vI and its a great lens, but its nice to have the 11-16 when I want wider and still be able to maintain 2.8.
photoames wrote:
Thank you all for your advice. The canon 16-35 seems like a no brainer since it will also work on my full frame film camera. However, I agree with moondigger that it just doesn't seem wide enough when on the mark III. In any lens, I'd like it to retain it's full functionality. Recently, I read some reviews that weren't too favorable on the Sigma lenses. It seems like I'm going to get vignetting with any of those lenses until about the 12 mm mark, so there really is no sense in the Sigma 10-20 if that is going to happen. JMC_Design, do you know if the Tokina would also work on a full frame camera? What camera body are you using the lens on?
David, I had no idea that the canon 10-22 could be modified! Thanks for alerting me to that option. Have you done it? I found this link http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=361877 and it shows them replacing the back baffle with one from an EF lens to keep out the dust. Seems like a good solution since I'll be in the 12 mm range like all the other lenses without vignetting. Plus, it's a Canon lens and it could always be undone if I wanted to sell it! That is really something to consider......Show more →
With my 1D Mk2 (same crop factor) I had used the Canon 17-35 f/2.8 L and the Sigma 15mm fisheye. (Tried the Canon 15 mm FE first but the Sigma was sharper). To be honest I prefer the 15mm fisheye because 1) its sharper than the 17-35 on the edges and 2) my UWA shots are landscapes and I can usually shoot at an angle that takes the distortion out of the picture (see shot below and note the 2 people on top of bridge for sharpness). I recently bought a Sigma 15-30 mm because I needed something sharper than the 17-35 for my 5D and I chose the 15-30 over the 12-24 because of the numerous write-ups stating it is sharper than the 12-24. Can't vouch for that but it is sharper than my 17-35L lens - an it shoots just fine on the 1DMk2.
Brgds,
Dave
