How wide is wide enough?

Discussion of lenses, brand or independent, uses and merits
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Eiffel
Initiate
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:49 pm

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby Eiffel » Sat Aug 20, 2016 12:00 am

I bought a sigma 12-24 from DK a few years ago, but am not using it much as it is really a niche lens.

I do enjoy the odd panorama using stitching with Lightroom. It is a convenient substitute which doesn't add any weight!
Proud owner of DK's dearly missed A900 ;-)

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3689
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sun Aug 21, 2016 1:39 pm

Depends what you intend to use it for. For full frame 24mm is pretty wide but stops short of ultra wide (which to me is below 24mm say 20mm and under). Once you get to fisheye lenses they are IMO very niche products. As there are some affordable UWA lenses around such as the 17-35mm granted not a high end lens but quite good for the price and a full frame one..not really any reason to not have one.

I started with the 19-35mm super budget it wasn't bad, moved to the 17-35mm which was an improvement. The 11-18mm Tokina is used for the APS-C cameras and that gets me in the ball park if not a touch wider than the 17mm on full frame. For interior shots the lens has paid for itself, landscape work is tricky it's not always a great lens for that unless you can fill the foreground with something to draw people in. When it does work it can be superb though just requires some skill to get the desired results. I find UWA lenses quite fun and I think it's important to have one. I use mine a fair bit though it's not high up the list for new users those who have most of the range covered well it's a must have I think. Now what you get is up to you the Zeiss stuff is I am sure superb, though very pricey.

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:33 pm

Earlier this year I traded my 12mm Voigtlander full frame for a 10mm (new model) which is the widest you can buy anywhere with straight lines. It is used very rarely, but when needed, it's more than useful. But it's an extreme luxury and in the course of a normal day's shooting I would not use it. I had a chance to use the new Zeiss Batis lenses including the 25mm and 18mm (alongside this lens) and fully expected to use the 18mm most - but I did not. The 25mm got most use (and you already have that). Then the 10mm, because if you need an absolute extreme, you need that extreme (and you can crop if it's too much). Of the lenses I have used in the last two or three years, the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f/2 for APS-C E mount stands out - small, light, fast and easy to focus manually. But they don't make one for DSLR/SLT and the 14mm f/2.8 is a pretty old design, which the Sigma 12-24mm will beat in every way except maximum aperture.

So it really does almost come down to the Sigma 12-24mm still being the best A-mount choice for anyone whose widest lens is a 24mm, unless you want to use filters in which case hunting down a 17-35mm f/2.8-4 KM D/Tamron or a 16-35mm f/2.8 CZ would be worthwhile. If you can find one, a mint condition Tamron or Tokina M-AF fit 17mm prime lens is not a bad choice, and there is always the still-current Sony 20mm f/2.8 though I think that jump from 24mm to 16-18mm is what most users want.

User avatar
pakodominguez
Minister with Portfolio
Posts: 2544
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:38 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby pakodominguez » Tue Aug 23, 2016 3:48 am

David Kilpatrick wrote:...There is always the still-current Sony 20mm f/2.8 though I think that jump from 24mm to 16-18mm is what most users want.

HI David,

Had you try the Minolta/Sony 20mm f2.8 on modern cameras? I had it long time ago and sold it because I didn't find anything special on 6, 10 or 12 MP, but I haven't try it on 24 or 36 MP...

Best
Pako
------------
http://www.pakodominguez.photo/blog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:19 am

I tried it on the A900 but not on the A99. It had quite strong moustache type distortion. However, with the A99 and also with the latest Adobe software that is lens profile corrected now so it would be a much more useful lens - there were no lens profiles when the A900 was launched and I created a few new ones which Adobe still uses. Now there's an official 20mm profile it could be a good choice for a compact, fast plain wide-angle.

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:02 am

Here's a super-cheap A-mount AF wide zoom - UK - https://www.lcegroup.co.uk/Used/Tamron- ... 31674.html

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:12 pm

Cogito wrote:Sury, if you haven't made your mind up yet, why not check out the lenses on http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/results.asp?chbLensType=3
The lens marks out of 5 are much of a muchness and most lenses have entries in the Dyxum sample images so you can judge for yourself......


Thank you Tony. I am exploring the options for wide angle photography since I have not done any.
I thought I will start somewhere and expand along the way and am looking for suggestions.

Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:13 pm

Birma wrote:Hi Sury, I suggest the Sigma 12-24 (current or previous marks). This will work on your full-frame and aps-c bodies. The 12mm end is plenty wide enough to experience UWA. If you just want more room left and right then panos might still be the best option. The UWA is for me as much about near and far perspective; how things close to you, and far away from you, look.

Perhaps rent one for a trip?


I have not thought of renting one. Great idea. Let me explore that further, Andy.

Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Wed Aug 24, 2016 9:44 pm

Eiffel wrote:I bought a sigma 12-24 from DK a few years ago, but am not using it much as it is really a niche lens.

I do enjoy the odd panorama using stitching with Lightroom. It is a convenient substitute which doesn't add any weight!


Eiffel,
I think it will be a niche lens for me too. I am curious to explore the UWA photography. I am an amateur who enjoys photography
so getting it absolutely right is not necessary for me. :)

Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:49 pm

bfitzgerald wrote:Depends what you intend to use it for. For full frame 24mm is pretty wide but stops short of ultra wide (which to me is below 24mm say 20mm and under). Once you get to fisheye lenses they are IMO very niche products. As there are some affordable UWA lenses around such as the 17-35mm granted not a high end lens but quite good for the price and a full frame one..not really any reason to not have one.

I started with the 19-35mm super budget it wasn't bad, moved to the 17-35mm which was an improvement. The 11-18mm Tokina is used for the APS-C cameras and that gets me in the ball park if not a touch wider than the 17mm on full frame. For interior shots the lens has paid for itself, landscape work is tricky it's not always a great lens for that unless you can fill the foreground with something to draw people in. When it does work it can be superb though just requires some skill to get the desired results. I find UWA lenses quite fun and I think it's important to have one. I use mine a fair bit though it's not high up the list for new users those who have most of the range covered well it's a must have I think. Now what you get is up to you the Zeiss stuff is I am sure superb, though very pricey.


Barry,
Thank you for the info. Is 17-35 a Minolta lens?

Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:03 am

David,
Thank you for the pointers and information on lenses. Looks like Sigma 12-24 seems to be a good starting point any which way.
Thank you for the link to LCE. I will also see if I can find the same lens on eBay since LCE is not an option for me. I will try to limit
my search to Sigma 12-24 and Minolta 17-35 (I think Barry suggested the same) and if I find the Tamron 19-35 I might pick one.

With best regards,
Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
Cogito
Grand Caliph
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: Chatteris, Cambridgeshire.

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby Cogito » Fri Aug 26, 2016 12:03 am

Sury, one of my favourite lens when I used a film SLR was an old Sigma 18mm lens. Equivalent to a 12mm a-mount. I found it entirely useable as I'm sure you'd find a 12-24 lens now. I only used 2 lenses (not strictly true) with film, the 18mm and an ancient Soligor zoom, somewhere in the range 40-150mm. Both lenses took care of most occasions. Here are 3 images taken with the 18mm lens. Not for c&c, merely to show that it's not too wide for everyday use. If it had been an 18-36mm that would have been heaven.

Image

Image

Image
Last edited by Cogito on Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tony
Be you ever so high, the law is above you. Lord Denning

User avatar
sury
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:58 am
Location: San Jose, California, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby sury » Fri Aug 26, 2016 12:24 am

Tony,
Thank you for the examples. I thought I would see more distortion at these focal lengths.

Sury
Minimize avoidable sufferings - Sir Karl Popper

User avatar
pakodominguez
Minister with Portfolio
Posts: 2544
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:38 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby pakodominguez » Fri Aug 26, 2016 2:03 am

sury wrote:my search to Sigma 12-24 and Minolta 17-35 (I think Barry suggested the same) and if I find the Tamron 19-35 I might pick one.

With best regards,
Sury

Sury: PM sent....
Pako
------------
http://www.pakodominguez.photo/blog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Dusty
Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
Posts: 2314
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:04 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Re: How wide is wide enough?

Unread postby Dusty » Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:51 pm

Sury,

I know you travel a bit, and if you've ever been inside a building that you wanted to photograph, or one where there is too much clutter in front to really show it when you step back far enough to get it in frame, you'll like the UWA.

Dusty
An a700 and couple of a580s, plus even more lenses.


Return to “Lens Lore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron