Stuck between these Ultra wide.

[DiMmY]

Heh, hi guys! Saw that I got a few hits from this website and was wondering what the hell and I see that my shots of the 10-20 on the 1ds and 1d have been posted here.

I was very surprised to see how bad the vignetting was on the 1ds, what surprised me more is the shape of it at 10mm.

On the 1d, the 10-20 is easily usable from 11mm onwards at a relatively low apeture (above f/8 or so it becomes really apparant the vignetting)

 

[kross]

Heh, hi guys! Saw that I got a few hits from this website and was wondering what the hell and I see that my shots of the 10-20 on the 1ds and 1d have been posted here.

I was very surprised to see how bad the vignetting was on the 1ds, what surprised me more is the shape of it at 10mm.

On the 1d, the 10-20 is easily usable from 11mm onwards at a relatively low apeture (above f/8 or so it becomes really apparant the vignetting)

welcome!!

 

[peteloud]

Hi Guys,

I am surprised at the little mention of Sigma.

I am wondering which ultra-wide or fisheye I should buy to go with a 350D. So far, my favourite is the Sigma 8mm fisheye. That might be because that my particular aim is to take a load of panoramas with the fisheye, combined with 'normal' photography which for me starts at about a 24mm (35mm equiv.) lens. I feel that I don't have much need between fisheye and the 24mm (equiv.). I suppose it's all about what is one's particular interest in photography.

However your comment are interesting and informative, but why no supporters for Sigma?

Cheers,

 

[DiMmY]

Hi Guys,

I am surprised at the little mention of Sigma.

I am wondering which ultra-wide or fisheye I should buy to go with a 350D. So far, my favourite is the Sigma 8mm fisheye. That might be because that my particular aim is to take a load of panoramas with the fisheye, combined with 'normal' photography which for me starts at about a 24mm (35mm equiv.) lens. I feel that I don't have much need between fisheye and the 24mm (equiv.). I suppose it's all about what is one's particular interest in photography.

However your comment are interesting and informative, but why no supporters for Sigma?

Cheers,

I'm not sure that buying a fisheye for panoramas is the way to go. Fisheyes bring in a lot of distortions, which you often try and avoid in panoramas. Even with something like a 10-20 you would need a panorama head or something of the sort to get a distortion free image of say, an interior.

I've never heard much about the Sigma 8mm, I just think there arn't that many people who use fisheyes. You could check out the Peleng 8mm or Zenitar 16mm fisheyes if you want something cheap, but they're both MF and require a M42 -> EOS adapter.

 

[Ljung]

sigma 12-24 on 5D for your interest, though not in the list for comparison here...

http://www.dphotojournal.com/sigma-12-24mm-f45-56-ex-dg-hsm/

 

[buck]

Here is another proud owner of the canon len 10-22 @ $1080

 

[Hoky]

Here is another proud owner of the canon len 10-22 @ $1080

Did you buy it from Oracle?

 

[calebk]

Hi Guys,

I am surprised at the little mention of Sigma.

I am wondering which ultra-wide or fisheye I should buy to go with a 350D. So far, my favourite is the Sigma 8mm fisheye. That might be because that my particular aim is to take a load of panoramas with the fisheye, combined with 'normal' photography which for me starts at about a 24mm (35mm equiv.) lens. I feel that I don't have much need between fisheye and the 24mm (equiv.). I suppose it's all about what is one's particular interest in photography.

However your comment are interesting and informative, but why no supporters for Sigma?

Cheers,

Using the 8mm-FE on a APS-C sensor body will get you vignetting at the edges. It's been brought up a few times on CS. I think you could search for it and find sample pics.

You might like the bubble effect though. Well, to each his own.

Cheers.

EDIT: The thread regarding 8mm-FE crop is found here.

 

[louist]

Picture below taken with Tokina 12-24 f4. Focal point was on the cyclist, the soft focus on buildings was intentional.

For your reference.

 

[slacker123]

last month's issue of national geographic featured pictures from a photographer using a 20D and a 10-22mm

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0610/feature3/gallery1.html


in my opinion, the 10-22 is a great lens, a little bit strong on distortion on the wide end.. but heck.. it is 10mm after all... light, sharp and well, the focusing really doesn't matter since it easily reaches hyperfocal...

 

[slacker123]

and if you use something like the 1/focal length rule... I'd say it really won't be a problem to handhold this lens at 10mm at about 1/4s, just hold your breath a little bit... and smile

 

[HydroPoP]

Nobody buy the Tokina? :think:

 

[calebk]

The image quality of the 10-22 is second to none, at least compared to the other lenses you're choosing from. Excellent flare control most of the time, wide, contrasty, with super-quick USM AF to boot.

Its price tag is another issue.

 

[thw]

Nobody buy the Tokina? :think:

I did. And sold it. Heavy, large and prone to CA as well as flare.

Of course, there are those who like it. :bsmilie: :bsmilie: