Wide Angle Lens (2016)

[MFPalmer]

I searched the forums previously but figured I would make a new thread with some lens companies bringing new gear out.

I'm thinking of getting a new wide angle lens for the 2016 season. I have a 6D and 17-40L. I'm wondering if it would be worth upgrading to a shorter lens, like a 10 or 12mm. I'm not interested in a Tokina or Rokinon because I'm lazy and don't want to use manual focus (more seriously, I do non-storm photography where a manual focus lens isn't something I want). I'm not worried about the speed of the lens as the 6D has great high ISO performance.

My question: is it worth getting a shorter lens, or would you not really see a big difference in field of view from the 17-40? I have the Sigma 35mm ART and am blown away by it, so I'm looking at Sigma's 12-24 4.5-5.6. Is it really worth it to get the extra 5mm of length? My main goal is to get some good structure shots this season.

Thanks!

 

[Ethan Schisler]

I have a 16-28mm F/2.8 for my Nikon D610, and I love it for shooting storm structure shots or just getting wide scenes. Its pretty sharp, even some reviews comparing it to the MUCH more expensive 14-24 F/2.8. I can't personally say for sure, since I've never touched the 14-24, but it is a good buy for the money IMO. You can get it for Canon as well and it does have auto focus, I usually use the manual on it though since the AF can be a little slow. Its not terrible, but its not the best I've ever used either.

As far as getting a shorter lens, if you already have the 17-40mm, I don't think the extra mm from the 16-28 is going to make a difference. Unless you are considering getting a 14mm prime, then it might be worth a little extra field view, however you said you want an AF lens, so that is out of question! I personally think 16mm is wide enough to get the structure, and in the rare case it isn't, I always do a vertical pano and stitch them in photoshop later.

Here is a good example shot I took near Rapid City, SD last year. I shot this at 16mm and the storm was nearly on top of me. The 16mm with a full frame camera proved to be wide enough for my shot:



I hope this helps your decision somewhat!

 

[Brett Roberts]

As a former 6D owner, I would strongly recommend picking up the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 prime to compliment your 17-40L. At only $300, it's almost a no-brainer. You can find it branded as either Samyang, Rokinon, or Bower, depending on which online retailer you use, but they're all the same lens.

A word of caution: this 14mm f/2.8 has notoriously poor quality control, meaning that there are lots of "bad copies" floating around out there. The bad copies tend to have a decentered element, which causes either the right or left side of the frame to be very soft and out-of-focus. I had to buy this lens twice (once on Canon, and again after I switched to Nikon). Between the two purchase attempts, I think I went through 5 total copies of the lens, repeatedly exchanging one copy for another. I'm lucky my Amazon and B&H accounts weren't banned, and I think I was on a first-name basis with the UPS guy back when this happened a couple years ago! In all honesty, if you're lucky enough to find someone selling used locally and they'll let you test it out, that might be a safer bet than buying new online (sadly). If you do buy online, I would recommend testing it thoroughly as soon as you receive it to determine whether an exchange is warranted.

Having said all that, once you find a copy without the decentering issue, it's probably the best bargain in all of storm photography gear. You'll find yourself rarely using anything else for up-close structure shots. It's absolutely razor sharp out to the extreme corners from f/5.6 down, which is something almost no wide-angle zoom on full-frame can manage. In fact, you'll probably be blown away by the improvement in edge and corner sharpness over the 17-40L, which frustrated me to no end when I owned Canon (but that's for another post).

As far as the field-of-view: there's a big difference between 14mm and 17mm on full-frame. You can certainly get by with 17mm for structure shots, but once you have 14mm available, you'll opt for it at least 50% of the time.

EDIT: Only now did I bother to re-read your whole post and see you said you weren't interested in MF! I can understand that if you do non-storm photography, but this lens is so great for the price that I'm going to leave my post up anyway, just in case others looking for similar advice wind up here. From what I understand, the Sigma 12-24mm is not as sharp at the wide end as the Samyang is at 14mm, but it might still be worth considering if you require AF. The wider FOV over the 17-40L will be very helpful for structure shots.

 

[Todd Lemery]

Wow. All I can say is I'm impressed by the quality of the pictures some of you guys take. I'm humbled.......


Sent from my iPad using Stormtrack mobile app

 

[kevin-palmer]

@Ethan Schisler I recently bought a Tokina 16-28mm f2.8 but I have yet to shoot any storms with it. I'm glad to see another chaser likes it. The Nikon 14-24mm is way overpriced.

I agree with what Brett said about Samyang lenses. If you can get a good copy they're extremely sharp and a great value. Manual focus really isn't a big deal with an ultrawide lens. 90% of the time you set it to infinity and forget it. The 14mm f2.8 is also great for astrophotography if you ever want to try that.

Field of view is sometimes a better way to measure how wide a lens truly is. The 17-40mm is 104° at its widest, the Samyang 14mm is 116°, and the Sigma 12-24mm is 122°.

 

[MFPalmer]

Great shot, Ethan! Those are the types of shots I'm going after this season. Brett, you make a pretty good case for looking into a Rokinon!

 

[Brian Rose]

I have the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and overall one of my sharper lens and at a very fair price. I will be buying the Samyang 14 F/2.8 next have seen to many great images with it, but may take a return or two to get a good copy.
This image was shot at 17mm but on a 1.5x crop sensor not a full frame and makes a very noticeable difference, so the focal length multiplier would be 25.5mm on this image, great image Ethan!