A&P new lens time

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Paul Revere, Nov 19, 2006.

  1. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    looking to get a wide(er) angle replacement for the 18-55mm.

    these are the ones i have in mind:

    Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 (would the Tokina 12-24mm be better?)
    Canon 17-40mm f/4 USM L
    Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

    budget is approx 500-700 (i think these should fit).

    does anyone have any experience with these lenses, or other lenses i havent mentioned and want to chime in?

    they're for a canon (if you couldn't tell), and the lenses i already have are: 18-55mm, canon 50mm f/1.8, tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. the 28-75 is great, but i find myself in some situations where i'd like something a bit wider.

    ive heard good things from people on OT about the 10-22 and the 17-40, but i've only read about the tamron 17-50 and the tokina 12-24.

    sorry for the long winded post :o and TIA for the help :)
     
  2. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    now that i think about it, the 10-22 and 12-24 might be too "fisheye" for my taste. what do people think about the 17-40 and 17-50?
     
  3. Tedrzz

    Tedrzz New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    It seems like you have alot of lenses that are all the same focal length. Ever consider a 70-200 F/4?

    From what I hear the 17-40L sounds like a nice piece of glass
     
  4. mattsb2000

    mattsb2000 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,666
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    San Bernardino, CA

    They aren't fish.

    Rent some shit before you buy.
     
  5. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    link?
     
  6. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    i have a 28-75mm, a 50mm and im looking to replace the 18-55mm which i got with my camera. :confused:
     
  7. famous

    famous OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,735
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Denver
    hes saying youve got 18-75 covered now, between 3 lens...consider buying a Tele so you'll have 18-200 with 4 lens. Then replace the 18-55 with something else, later
     
  8. mattsb2000

    mattsb2000 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    Messages:
    61,666
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    San Bernardino, CA

    Location?
     
  9. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    merced, ca
     
  10. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    ohhhh. well, that seems like a good idea but i dont know how often i would put a tele to use now :dunno:

    a wider lens seems more practical for me now
     
  11. CornUponCob

    CornUponCob New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    15,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you want to go to 10mm, I'd really recomend the Canon over the Tonkina or Sigma versions, it's signifigantly better.

    I'm not going to bother commenting on the debate between the Tamron and the 17-40 f4. There are a lot of factors that influence that decision, too many for me to ask you.
     
  12. famous

    famous OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,735
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Denver

    care to list? im in the same boat-dont knwo if i want to throw down the extra 250 for a stop/10mm less.
     
  13. ( * )( * )

    ( * )( * ) OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    0
    10-22mm or 17-55 2.8 if you can pony up a few more hundred.
     
  14. NSX

    NSX OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2004
    Messages:
    8,942
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    none yo'
    Sigma 10-20... $499
     
  15. joy division

    joy division New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    16,419
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hollywood, LAids
    I shoot with the 10-22, 17-40 and 50 1.4 almost exclusively these days. But thats because I still have a gay 1.6 ...which I'm assuming you do as well, find out what you shoot and then go rent some glass and see which suits you.

    Had the 17-40 for about 6 months before borrowing the 10-22 from my friend, use it alot but you do get a ton of ca around the edges if that isn't something you want...make bitches legs look 2300 feet long.


    I believe these were all wide open:


    17-40:

    (bridezilla rofl)
    [​IMG]




    [​IMG]




    10-22:

    (band shoot)

    [​IMG]
     
  16. saebryan

    saebryan New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,339
    Likes Received:
    0
    10-22 Canon is the best super wide angle out there. I have been easily able to controll barrelling and the "fishy" look by concentrating on keeping the camera level. Image sharpness is awesome and color rendering is really good.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. joy division

    joy division New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    16,419
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    hollywood, LAids
    only problem is it won't work on a full frame...but the resale values are great, don't lose much.
     
  18. ( * )( * )

    ( * )( * ) OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rofl:


    Damn they got some long ass legs.
     
  19. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    the canon 10-22 and tokina 12-24 are both good choices and they're not fisheye.

    if you want to rent lenses, check out rentglass.com.
     
  20. hsubaru

    hsubaru New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you think those wide angles are fisheye, you haven't played with a fisheye yet ;)

    The Canon and Tokina are both top notch, and you can't go wrong with either. I say 17-40L
     
  21. cftofu2k

    cftofu2k OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,949
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California
    i have the same lens line up as you, plus the tokina 12-24. its been on my rebel 80% of the time since i've got it.
     
  22. Jonny Chimpo

    Jonny Chimpo OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    64,725
    Likes Received:
    367
    Location:
    The sweaty asshole of the universe
    17-40 is a great lens (I love mine) but on a 1.6x body it really isn't all that wide. A 10-22 on the other hand is very wide. You might also consider the Tokina 12-24.
     
  23. Paul Revere

    Paul Revere OT Supporter

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    38,934
    Likes Received:
    175
    Location:
    Cali-NO NFA-fornia
    cool. i knew there was some website where you could rent lenses, thanks for posting it :wavey: i'll check it out
     
  24. utopia699

    utopia699 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    thats right!
     

Share This Page