Super wide angle lens experience?

[IPT]

Looking to "expand" my collection of gear. I have a 20 mm Sigma that I like. I see that the 15mm has almsot TWICE the angle of view (180 degrees vs 91 degrees).

a - does anyone have these two focal lengths (full sensor body) and care to comment?

b - Seems like the Sigma is a "diagonal" fisheye and the Canon is not. What os the difference if any (the Sigma is actually $50 more than the Canon - I am not oppossed to paying more if it is for a good reason though I do like to have Canon gear I like my 20 mm Sigma).

LAstly, though I would like to grab a zoom they are too slow. I NEED F2.8 or faster for the Northern Lights.

 

[Bn251]

Look up the Canon EF Wide-angle zoom lens 16 mm-35 mm F/2.8 L series i think it would be great for shooting the Northern Lights

 

[IPT]

yeah, I forgot about that one but had looked at it in the past. It's a zoom so as good as it is (and I know it is good) it may lack a tad of sharpness verse the prime. I'll be shooting wide open most of the time too so need all the sharpness I can get. Also, it is an additional $850!

Since I already have a 20mm f1.8, a 24mm f1.8, 50mm f 1.4, and the 24-105 it would be redundant really over most of the range. This is going to be a "specialty" lens that probably won't even leave the house all that often. the 15mm weighs 3/4 of a pound, the 16-35 is twice that too. Often I lug all this "gear" in the snow in the subzero weather so lighter is better!

 

[BlueCorn]

The 15mm is a fisheye lens so it has a wider field of view than the 16mm. When I bought mine I thought that it'd be a "specialty" lens as well. It ended up being my favorite lens. Buy it. You'll like it.

 

[IPT]

Doug -
did you get the Canon or the Sigma?
What is Sigma talking about when they say "diagonal" fisheye?

 

[sphelps]

I believe fisheye lenses give a wider viewing angle. I've used both a sigma 10mm non-fisheye and a Nikkor 10.5mm fisheye on my D300 and the 10.5 clearly had a wider angle but also significantly more distortion. I own the 10.5 which gives an 35mm equivalent of just under 16mm on my camera and I'm very happy with it. Because of the distortion it's not the best for landscapes but very cool for close ups. A couple examples:

Landscape:

Close Ups

Also the 10.5 is a 2.8 however because the wider angle allows for more light I very rarely find myself using the largest aperture.

 

[TWallace]

Have you considered the Tokina 11-16 2.8? It is not a fisheye (a plus in my book) and is very fast, though not much of a zoom. It's also cheaper than either the Canon or Sigma 15mm. I got mine for my Nikon D90 and love it. It's always out of stock online but you can pre-order through Adorama and they'll ship it to you when they get it. Took me two months to get mine through Adorama.

 

[IPT]

The Tokina won't fit my 5D, or the 1Ds..

So, the "Fisheye" is more distorted? I just thought that any super wide angle lens would give you distortion especially if you angled it up or downwards.

 

[sphelps]

The Tokina won't fit my 5D, or the 1Ds..

So, the "Fisheye" is more distorted? I just thought that any super wide angle lens would give you distortion especially if you angled it up or downwards.

That's what I noticed, I think the lens protrudes out more which results in a larger viewing angle but possibly only in some directions.

 

[IPT]

not sure, but I think it is because of the sensor size. Some of those ultra wide lenses were made to allow a wide angle view compensating for the crop factor on the bodies without the full sensor. I forget the mount type (name) but Canon has a few lenses that will only fit certain bodies.


Also, doesn't PS4 have a "filter" to correct the distortion from the fisheye?

 

[sphelps]

not sure, but I think it is because of the sensor size. Some of those ultra wide lenses were made to allow a wide angle view compensating for the crop factor on the bodies without the full sensor. I forget the mount type (name) but Canon has a few lenses that will only fit certain bodies.


Also, doesn't PS4 have a "filter" to correct the distortion from the fisheye?

That could very well be true and makes a lot of sense, my 10.5mm is a dx lens so it's designed for crop factors while I believe the sigma 10mm was not a dx lens, however I'm not 100% on that.

You can correct the distortion to a point with the lens filter in PS but not all the way, you'll have to manually distort the picture using the appropriate tools to get things like horizons straight.

 

[Jacob D]

Canon 16-35/2.8L
Canon 14/2.8L
Sigma 14/2.8
Samyang 14/2.8 <-- I'm really curious about this lens, these guys seem to be drawing a small crowd lately with their fast+inexpensive lenses

 

[IPT]

Jacob - any dicernable difference between the Sigma and Canon?

 

[IPT]

No-one on the Canon version vs the Sigma?? I am gonna pull the trigger soon I think.

 

[t5Nitro]

I have no experience with any super wide lens. Whichever you decide on post some reviews for me.

 

[sphelps]

No-one on the Canon version vs the Sigma?? I am gonna pull the trigger soon I think.

I don't use cannon but I've never noticed a difference in quality between sigma and nikkor before, I usually opt for the nikkor lens simply because it matches the camera better and I assume it may somehow work a little better since it was designed by the same company that made the body. I bought a sigma 150mm because nikkor didn't make one but other than that I have all nikkor lenses.

So basically go with what you think is best, I highly doubt there is a substantial difference other than price.

 

[Tremont]

I have the Sigma 12-24. It works for wide landscape shots, but is pretty soft. Most of the daylight stuff I've done with it turned out pretty good, but night shots look pretty bad (lights tend to get big halo's/flares and it is a slow lens so I end up shooting at high ISO to keep my exposure time where I want it). I would much prefer the Canon 24mm 1.4, I rent this lens whenever I need to do nice wide angle stuff...I also have a pretty hard time making a nice composition with the Sigma @ 12mm...it's just too wide on my 5dmarkii.

 

[IPT]

I found this. Anyone here have real world expereince I am all ears.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2171688&postcount=3

 

[Jacob D]

I haven't used any of the lenses mentioned above. If it was me looking to buy a 14mm prime, or fisheye I would rent it first.

 

[IPT]

Well, I pulled the trigger. I went with the Sigma primarily because most of the reviews call them about equal with regards to the quality of the images. However, the sigma has a minimum focusing distance of about 2.5"'s closer than the Canon does. Also I have seen a few comments about the Sigma having less CA.