# Which Wide Angle lens?



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

I'm after a wide angle lens for my Canon 400D, but not sure which to get. I went into my local camera shop at the weekend, and was recommended the Sigma 16-35 which costs £309, as opposed to the Canon, which was £800.

I notice the pro's have them, so they can get the whole car into the scene, when it's in the garage. I'd like to get one, so that this can be done. I've also heard that some can make the image distorted if it gets too wide.

I'd like to spend as little as possible, but around the Sigma price would be good, as that's the one i'm considering at the moment, if it'd be good for in-garage shots.

HELP please.

Thanks :thumb:


----------



## clifford (Aug 19, 2007)

i have the sigma 17-35 and its a great lens in my oppinion


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

It could be the 17-35 he mentioned then, or is there a 16-35 Sigma?

Have you any pics Clifford using the 17-35mm?


----------



## clifford (Aug 19, 2007)

will dig some out tomorrow mate its my birthday today and im getting enough stick for being online from the wife:thumb:


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

:lol: ok mate, thanks.

Happy Birthday :thumb:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

16mm on a APS-c sensor is actually about 26mm so not all that wide!


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

rmorgan - That means nothing to me TBH :lol:

Any chance you know of a good lens to get?

I'm sure Jedi-Knight has one, which looks good in his pics, and also Iain (Finer Details) i think has one.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

beardboy said:


> rmorgan - That means nothing to me TBH :lol:
> 
> Any chance you know of a good lens to get?
> 
> I'm sure Jedi-Knight has one, which looks good in his pics, and also Iain (Finer Details) i think has one.


basically a 16mm lens on a non full frame canon has a 1.6x magnification, so what ever the focal length of the lens is you need to multiply it by 1.6 to get the actual focal length.

Sigma do a 10-20 for the canon, which is okay, not the best lens in the world but will certainly satisfty yours needs as a beginner.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Thanks 

So, the 10-20 is actually 16-32?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

beardboy said:


> Thanks
> 
> So, the 10-20 is actually 16-32?


Yeah!


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Ok.

Any other lens for about the same price you'd recommend?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

there is a good tokina in terms of build quality and sharpness but the chromatic aberation is woeful! For the price range the sigma is as good as you are gonna get!


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Blimey - all these terms and focal lengths multiplying by other things! :lol:

Get's complicated!


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

beardboy said:


> Blimey - all these terms and focal lengths multiplying by other things! :lol:
> 
> Get's complicated!


Sorry should have explained, chromatic aberation is the purple/blue/green line that appears on the outlines of shapes/objects

For example:


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Ah yeah, i see that. Hmmm, when you see that it is not something i'd want in my pics.

Got a rough cost on the Sigma?


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1007710


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Thanks - Similar price to the 17-35 that i was looking at then.

Will have to look into that one :thumb:

Thanks for your help


----------



## jedi-knight83 (Aug 11, 2006)

i have a nikon d200 and use a tamron 17-50 for day to day shots.

i bought a sigma 10-20 though while is was in america and love it. I did alot of reading of various reviews and it actually came out pretty well against the nikon lens... which although they said the nikon was a bit better... is about twice as expensive!


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Have you any pics of both you could post for example?

Which do you find is best for close shots, where space isn't very good, such as in a garage?


----------



## clipstone (Nov 29, 2006)

The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is a good lens - the glass in it is reputed to be almost on a par with the 'L' series lenses, but Canon will not give the 'L' staus to its EF-S type lenses for some reason.

I have this lens - its good


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

clipstone said:


> The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is a good lens - the glass in it is reputed to be almost on a par with the 'L' series lenses, but Canon will not give the 'L' staus to its EF-S type lenses for some reason.
> 
> I have this lens - its good


Nearly ouble the price of the sigma though


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

I got a nice Sigma 10mm Fisheye for the pricey sum of £500 for my nikon.

Great lens! fun to play with


----------



## imagewizzard (Apr 13, 2008)

for me i recomend a sigma 10-20 all the time over the canon 10-22

for photos of cars and nice angles the sigma is good

this pic was taken with the sigma theres no end of fun you can have with it


----------



## Matt T (Mar 31, 2008)

clipstone said:


> The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is a good lens - the glass in it is reputed to be almost on a par with the 'L' series lenses, but Canon will not give the 'L' staus to its EF-S type lenses for some reason.
> 
> I have this lens - its good


If you can afford it the Canon is the best, can be had for £400


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

Canon is not the best, that is an opinion. Many would disagree with you.


----------



## imagewizzard (Apr 13, 2008)

EdCherry said:


> Canon is not the best, that is an opinion. Many would disagree with you.


so very true ..... only time i would disagree is if comparing canon L series


----------



## Matt T (Mar 31, 2008)

EdCherry said:


> Canon is not the best, that is an opinion. Many would disagree with you.


What is then? In Canon fit at that focal range(ish)


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

Personally, Sigma. Id always go for the over other lens now.


----------



## ADZphtg (Mar 23, 2008)

:lol: :lol: :lol: Sigma better than a Canon L lens :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

EdCherry said:


> Canon is not the best, that is an opinion. Many would disagree with you.





Matt T said:


> What is then? In Canon fit at that focal range(ish)





EdCherry said:


> Personally, Sigma. Id always go for the over other lens now.


come on you can't seriously think that a sigma lens is better than the canon L equivalent! Sigma do some brilliant lenses that are great bang for buck, but L glass is in a different league!


----------



## icedub (Nov 11, 2005)

My mate uses the Sigma 10 - 20mm on his Canon 400d, for the money this is a seriously good piece of kit. In my opinion you won't get better for the money, I don't think you would regret purchasing one of these.


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

I would not even bother paying out of a canon L lens. I wouldn't even bother trial it. I stay well away from canon gear, even though it isn't bad. Personally, if I was employed to take the images and the work required me to use such a fine quality lens, I might purchase one. Since none of my images need such a fine quality lens, and im not employed in the industry I wouldn't touch it. They are lens for people with big pockets or specialist work.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

Yeah that's fair enough, but the way you worded it implied that you thought the L glass was inferior to the sigma regardless of cost, but in fact you mean't you wouldn't spend that amount of money on them because they are too expensive for your needs!


----------



## imagewizzard (Apr 13, 2008)

intrestin the 10-22 is not and never will be a L lens and can not compeat as being one 

the sigma 10-20 is in the same leage as the canon between the 2 i still say sigma 

i will only buy canon lens .... Ls at that but the 10-20 has my cash 

as said we all difrent and all like difrent things and this should not be personal


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

imagewizzard said:


> intrestin the 10-22 is not and never will be a L lens and can not compeat as being one
> 
> the sigma 10-20 is in the same leage as the canon between the 2 i still say sigma
> 
> ...


 talk about contradicting yourself!


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

imagewizzard said:


> intrestin the 10-22 is not and never will be a L lens and can not compeat as being one
> 
> the sigma 10-20 is in the same leage as the canon between the 2 i still say sigma
> 
> ...


And in english?


----------



## Matt T (Mar 31, 2008)

The only reason the 10-22 is not an L lens is because its APS-C designed, otherwise it is L quality glass and construction without the red ring.

Get a good copy of the Sigma and you wont be dissapointed, but i know several people that have had dodgy copies and returned for the Canon, Sigma QC just isnt good enough imo.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Thanks for all the replies all.

Think i'm going to go and try out the Sigma 10-20 and go from there. Just seen dubnut's pics of his Leon using this lens and it's sort of swayed me :thumb:


----------



## dubnut71 (Jul 25, 2006)

beardboy said:


> Thanks for all the replies all.
> 
> Think i'm going to go and try out the Sigma 10-20 and go from there. Just seen dubnut's pics of his Leon using this lens and it's sort of swayed me :thumb:


I love it mate, have no quality issues with mine.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Can you tell me where you got your and what cost?

I know your camera is a Nikon, but they should be the same price i'd imagine.


----------



## EdCherry (Apr 14, 2008)

I got mine from a store called Castle Cameras. They were doing a pretty good price at the time.


----------



## dubnut71 (Jul 25, 2006)

beardboy said:


> Can you tell me where you got your and what cost?
> 
> I know your camera is a Nikon, but they should be the same price i'd imagine.


I got mine as a personal sale from another forum but they are retailing about £280 ish, warehouse express etc is a good bet


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Ok - thanks mate.


----------

