Crop sensor camera lenses - help!

What's Hot
RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
edited January 2 in Off Topic
I want to get a decent wide angle lens for my Canon 550D, which has a crop sensor. Its for my trip to New York in Jan. I'd like to take some landscapes but not massively wide. I have an old Tamron 10-22, which is ok but very large, and has very slight damage which I can now see instantly in the images.

Looking at the EF 24mm 2.8, which seems to be decent but just shy of 500 quid. Plus the focal lenth will be nearly 40mm on my camera, which is pretty limited for landscapes.

Anything else worth looking at?  

0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
«134

Comments

  • ionianionian Frets: 94
    Canon EF-s 10-18 is reasonably priced and good quality on Canon crop sensors
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • boogiemanboogieman Frets: 5871
    edited December 2018
    Either the Canon or Sigma 10-22 EFS are very nice lenses. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    boogieman said:
    Either the Canon or Sigma 10-22 EFS are very nice lenses. 

    Thanks. Used prices on eBay seem to be 250, which is be happy to pay if the optics are good. 

    Anyone have experience of buying used lenses?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • I've bought a few 2nd hand lenses (Sony emount) and I've never had a problem. I've even dabbled in vintage lenses and even these have been flawless.

    I'd recommend mpb.com if you don't fancy ebay. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • I have a Canon 80D and use the canon EFS 10-18 and the 24mm. Both are superb and I pretty much used both exclusively on my recent trip to NY last year. You could buy both for the price of that EF that you’re looking at and have some change. 
    Please check out my lifestyle blog and visit our Plot 27 Instagram account
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ionianionian Frets: 94
    edited December 2018
    I have bought and sold through mpb.com and can recommend them. They are not the cheapest place for second hand gear but their stuff is properly checked and fairly priced. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RiftAmpsRiftAmps Frets: 1640
    The Tokina 11-16 is a beast on the 550D
    *I no longer offer replacement speaker baffles*
    Rift Amplification
    Handwired Guitar Amplifiers
    Brackley, Northamptonshire
    www.riftamps.co.uk

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • boogiemanboogieman Frets: 5871
    I agree, MPB would be my first port of call rather than eBay. I’ve heard enough horror stories about people buying photo gear through eBay to put me off for life. MPB will give you a warranty, their prices are decent and their descriptions of the condition of the equipment are good: if anything they underrate the condition and it’ll arrive looking better than they’ve described. I’ve bought lots of gear from them, new and used, and never had a problem. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    I have a Canon 80D and use the canon EFS 10-18 and the 24mm. Both are superb and I pretty much used both exclusively on my recent trip to NY last year. You could buy both for the price of that EF that you’re looking at and have some change. 
    How did you find the 24mm? I guess it's close to 35mm on crop sensor. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • boogiemanboogieman Frets: 5871
    edited December 2018
    RMJ said:
    I have a Canon 80D and use the canon EFS 10-18 and the 24mm. Both are superb and I pretty much used both exclusively on my recent trip to NY last year. You could buy both for the price of that EF that you’re looking at and have some change. 
    How did you find the 24mm? I guess it's close to 35mm on crop sensor. 
    C size crop sensor is x1.6 so 24mm equates to 38mm. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BudgieBudgie Frets: 814
    As mentioned above, the Tokina 11-16mm is a superb lens with the added bonus of being f2.8. I had one when I had a D7100 and it was super sharp. I much preferred it to the Sigma 10-20mm, Tokina also do a 11-20mm too, which is also supposed to be very good.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJ said:
    I have a Canon 80D and use the canon EFS 10-18 and the 24mm. Both are superb and I pretty much used both exclusively on my recent trip to NY last year. You could buy both for the price of that EF that you’re looking at and have some change. 
    How did you find the 24mm? I guess it's close to 35mm on crop sensor. 
    I’m pretty much a beginner mate tbh but it’s been brill for me. I loved the 50mm and it was a big learn to get used to the challenges of a wide angle but in terms of performance I’ve found it to be brill. 

    But it again I’ll repeat, I’m a noob!
    Please check out my lifestyle blog and visit our Plot 27 Instagram account
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • I can't speak for Canon-system specifics, but I have the Fuji 10-24 and it's a great focal range for an APSC sensor. I rarely travel without it, plus something wider - either 35 or 18-135 depending on where i'm going.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    thanks guys. I actually dug out my wide angle lens, which is a Tokina (not Tamron) 12-24mm F4. I have got some decent images with it in the past so I am going to investigate the damage before forking out for something similar.  I am however going to look on MPB for a fast prime lens which will give me less than 50mm focal length. That'll do me nicely then for my trip I reckon.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJ said:
    I have a Canon 80D and use the canon EFS 10-18 and the 24mm. Both are superb and I pretty much used both exclusively on my recent trip to NY last year. You could buy both for the price of that EF that you’re looking at and have some change. 
    How did you find the 24mm? I guess it's close to 35mm on crop sensor. 
    I’m pretty much a beginner mate tbh but it’s been brill for me. I loved the 50mm and it was a big learn to get used to the challenges of a wide angle but in terms of performance I’ve found it to be brill. 

    But it again I’ll repeat, I’m a noob!

    To be honest, most modern lenses are pretty damn good! The eyes behind the lens are what creates the image, the rest is just tools.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • boogiemanboogieman Frets: 5871
    RMJ said:
    thanks guys. I actually dug out my wide angle lens, which is a Tokina (not Tamron) 12-24mm F4. I have got some decent images with it in the past so I am going to investigate the damage before forking out for something similar.  I am however going to look on MPB for a fast prime lens which will give me less than 50mm focal length. That'll do me nicely then for my trip I reckon.
    There’s a YouTube clip where a guy gradually destroys a lens in stages, taking photos with it at each point. He starts by scratching the front element and ends up by destroying the front of the lens completely with a hammer. Only the last stage produces any major problems and even then it produces an interesting effect. So I wouldn’t worry about replacing your lens too much if there’s only a bit of minor damage, take a few shots and see how things turn out.  ;)
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • I bought @RiftAmps 24mm pancake 2.8 Lens for my 500D and have loved it. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    mattdavis said:
    I bought @RiftAmps 24mm pancake 2.8 Lens for my 500D and have loved it. 
    yeah ive been looking at that one. not far off 35mm. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    RiftAmps said:
    The Tokina 11-16 is a beast on the 550D
    Ive been playing around with my Tokina 12-24 and F4 is limiting in low light. F2.8 on the 11-16 is therefore of interest. Sub 300 used too.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • hywelghywelg Frets: 2025
    I bought a Sigma ART 20mm F1.4 for work to use on my 7D, so it's about 32mm equivalent. I am very pleased with it. It is part of a plan though to ease the cost of upgrading to a 5D. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    hywelg said:
    I bought a Sigma ART 20mm F1.4 for work to use on my 7D, so it's about 32mm equivalent. I am very pleased with it. It is part of a plan though to ease the cost of upgrading to a 5D. 
    Yeah I've been looking at that one too. Pricey tho 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    edited December 2018
    Having researched this to death I think I'm gonna go for 17-55 f2.8. It's a kit lens upgrade but then I'll have decentish lenses from 12 to 55mm
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    Urgh this is becoming a complicated choice. I think I need a walk around lens rather than a wide angle, as my Tokina 12-24 appears to be fine.

    So my choices appear to be....

    17-55 f2.8 IS (or sigma equiv)
    17-40 f4L
    15-85 f3.5 to 5.6 IS
    24-70 f4L

    Internet wisdom says 17-55 f2.8 IS the one  to get. But it's expensive. And useless if I upgrade to full frame. There is a cheaper sigma version which is 17-50, but again useless on FF.

    My heart says the 17-40 Is the one to get. It's am L lens and 100+ quid cheaper. But it's only F4 and no IS.

    Or do I extend zoom range from my Tokina 12-24 and get a 24-70?! This would seem sensible but no doubt I'll be switching between the two all the time. 

    Help!



    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BudgieBudgie Frets: 814
    edited January 2
    I use a full frame camera and my go to lens is a 24-70mm (I also have a 18mm Zeiss for wide angle and currently a 70-300mm Nikon, which I may upgrade). The crop sensor equivalent is roughly 17-50mm. When I had a crop sensor Nikon I bought a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 and it was superbly sharp and a lot cheaper than the Nikon equivalent and reviewed rather well against too. I ended up selling the DX lenses when I changed to full frame and didn’t lose any cash at all. Sigma also make a 17-70mm lens too which is supposed to be good for the price. 

    I suppose it it depends on what sort of photography you are interested in. My interest is landscapes so I don’t need faster lenses as I generally use a tripod.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    Budgie said:
    I use a full frame camera and my go to lens is a 24-70mm. The crop sensor equivalent is roughly 17-50mm. When I had a crop sensor Nikon I bought a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 and it was superbly sharp and a lot cheaper than the Nikon equivalent and reviewed rather well against too. I ended up selling the DX lenses when I changed to full frame and didn’t lose any cash at all. Sigma also make a 17-70mm lens too which is supposed to be good for the price. 

    I suppose it it depends on what sort of photography you are interested in. My interest is landscapes so I don’t need faster lenses as I generally use a tripod.


    Thanks. I really want to buy a standard zoom that is flexible enough to take in some landscape through to portrait. 17-50 on a crop seems decent range for that? 

    I've seen mixed reviews of the Sigma 2.8 but it is so much cheaper than the Canon equiv. Good to hear some real world experience. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Without trying to sound daft, why is full frame an upgrade to you? 

    You are concerned about price. Bigger sensors mean bigger, more (often much more) expensive lenses - is it possible an upgrade for you would be going to a different aps-c sensor instead? 

    Despite marketing, image quality is almost entirely irrelevant these days. I had a choice for Sony or fuji and went fuji because of great, sharp lenses that are small, light and offer full frame results. 

    Not trying to steer you away, but you need to work out what you need. In my experience, using full frame lenses on a crop sensor is, at best, a terrible compromise. You'll lose sharpness as you're effectively cropping into the image circle it was designed for, it'll be much bigger than an equivalent aps-c lens and you'll gain nothing but potentially shallower depth of field (which is 99 percent a waste of time and money, but a huge marketing success). 

    F/4 full frame lenses are about the same size and weight of equivalent 2.8 lenses in aps-c. Is it worth losing a stop of light and probably sharpness for the sake of possibly upgrading later? 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    Without trying to sound daft, why is full frame an upgrade to you? 

    You are concerned about price. Bigger sensors mean bigger, more (often much more) expensive lenses - is it possible an upgrade for you would be going to a different aps-c sensor instead? 

    Despite marketing, image quality is almost entirely irrelevant these days. I had a choice for Sony or fuji and went fuji because of great, sharp lenses that are small, light and offer full frame results. 

    Not trying to steer you away, but you need to work out what you need. In my experience, using full frame lenses on a crop sensor is, at best, a terrible compromise. You'll lose sharpness as you're effectively cropping into the image circle it was designed for, it'll be much bigger than an equivalent aps-c lens and you'll gain nothing but potentially shallower depth of field (which is 99 percent a waste of time and money, but a huge marketing success). 

    F/4 full frame lenses are about the same size and weight of equivalent 2.8 lenses in aps-c. Is it worth losing a stop of light and probably sharpness for the sake of possibly upgrading later? 
    Not daft at all. Future proofing isn't a deal breaker for me but something I want to be aware of.  It's not an immediate aspiration so I'm inclined to buy the 'best lens to suit my current needs and kit. If the 17-40 doesn't do that then I'll happily pass on it.

    17-50 Is the range I'll shoot at most. 2.8 wouod be handy to have for indoors and IS is worth having if it's on offer and doesn't come at a significant premium. 

    If money wasn't an issue I would go for the 17-55. But it's very expensive, even used. However i havent read a bad review of it. So hopefully it would hold its value if i did move on. 


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJ said:
    Without trying to sound daft, why is full frame an upgrade to you? 

    You are concerned about price. Bigger sensors mean bigger, more (often much more) expensive lenses - is it possible an upgrade for you would be going to a different aps-c sensor instead? 

    Despite marketing, image quality is almost entirely irrelevant these days. I had a choice for Sony or fuji and went fuji because of great, sharp lenses that are small, light and offer full frame results. 

    Not trying to steer you away, but you need to work out what you need. In my experience, using full frame lenses on a crop sensor is, at best, a terrible compromise. You'll lose sharpness as you're effectively cropping into the image circle it was designed for, it'll be much bigger than an equivalent aps-c lens and you'll gain nothing but potentially shallower depth of field (which is 99 percent a waste of time and money, but a huge marketing success). 

    F/4 full frame lenses are about the same size and weight of equivalent 2.8 lenses in aps-c. Is it worth losing a stop of light and probably sharpness for the sake of possibly upgrading later? 
    Not daft at all. Future proofing isn't a deal breaker for me but something I want to be aware of.  It's not an immediate aspiration so I'm inclined to buy the 'best lens to suit my current needs and kit. If the 17-40 doesn't do that then I'll happily pass on it.

    17-50 Is the range I'll shoot at most. 2.8 wouod be handy to have for indoors and IS is worth having if it's on offer and doesn't come at a significant premium. 

    If money wasn't an issue I would go for the 17-55. But it's very expensive, even used. However i havent read a bad review of it. So hopefully it would hold its value if i did move on. 



    I think I'd be inclined to stick with an apsc-c zoom in that case. You'll get sharper images, better low light and ois in something that's less huge than a 2.8 ff lens. 

    Wild card would be a 24mm and 50mm prime. Primes are generally just sharp all the time, even full frame ones. Canon has a nice 24mm ef-s prime that's tiny, sharp and fast  and the 50mm 1.8 will give you a nice portrait lens. Both together may be cheaper than a zoom, especially used. I'm not too knowledgeable about Canon aps-c lenses sadly, as they (along with nikon) completely neglected their aps-c systems to push people into the big-ticket full frame. This is a shame, but it is what it is. Sigma also have a 30mm art prime that's nice. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • RMJRMJ Frets: 1257
    RMJ said:
    Without trying to sound daft, why is full frame an upgrade to you? 

    You are concerned about price. Bigger sensors mean bigger, more (often much more) expensive lenses - is it possible an upgrade for you would be going to a different aps-c sensor instead? 

    Despite marketing, image quality is almost entirely irrelevant these days. I had a choice for Sony or fuji and went fuji because of great, sharp lenses that are small, light and offer full frame results. 

    Not trying to steer you away, but you need to work out what you need. In my experience, using full frame lenses on a crop sensor is, at best, a terrible compromise. You'll lose sharpness as you're effectively cropping into the image circle it was designed for, it'll be much bigger than an equivalent aps-c lens and you'll gain nothing but potentially shallower depth of field (which is 99 percent a waste of time and money, but a huge marketing success). 

    F/4 full frame lenses are about the same size and weight of equivalent 2.8 lenses in aps-c. Is it worth losing a stop of light and probably sharpness for the sake of possibly upgrading later? 
    Not daft at all. Future proofing isn't a deal breaker for me but something I want to be aware of.  It's not an immediate aspiration so I'm inclined to buy the 'best lens to suit my current needs and kit. If the 17-40 doesn't do that then I'll happily pass on it.

    17-50 Is the range I'll shoot at most. 2.8 wouod be handy to have for indoors and IS is worth having if it's on offer and doesn't come at a significant premium. 

    If money wasn't an issue I would go for the 17-55. But it's very expensive, even used. However i havent read a bad review of it. So hopefully it would hold its value if i did move on. 



    I think I'd be inclined to stick with an apsc-c zoom in that case. You'll get sharper images, better low light and ois in something that's less huge than a 2.8 ff lens. 

    Wild card would be a 24mm and 50mm prime. Primes are generally just sharp all the time, even full frame ones. Canon has a nice 24mm ef-s prime that's tiny, sharp and fast  and the 50mm 1.8 will give you a nice portrait lens. Both together may be cheaper than a zoom, especially used. I'm not too knowledgeable about Canon aps-c lenses sadly, as they (along with nikon) completely neglected their aps-c systems to push people into the big-ticket full frame. This is a shame, but it is what it is. Sigma also have a 30mm art prime that's nice. 
    Thanks. I do have the 50mm prime already. Getting a wider prime is an option. I'd just have to be prepared to switch when required. A zoom appeals to me as it removes that burden for general purposes. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MayneheadMaynehead Frets: 1648
    Might be useful to list the lenses you already have.

    I reckon if you have the kit lens then that should be good enough as a walk around, so you'll just need a wide angle zoom for architecture. I heard the  Sigma 10-22 is a good choice.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.