Looking for the "perfect" wide angle zoom

[snap]

I understand that there is no "perfect" lense. It all depends. But...
I have a rebel XT and am looking for a wide angle zoom for landscape shots. I occasionally shoot in low light situations, so need something faster than a f/4 lense. I am oftern in situations (on the side of a mountain, in a small stream bed, etc.) where I cannont move forward or back, so a prime lense is not a good option. In some of these situations it would be impossible to use a tripod. I am considering purchasing the Canon 16-35 2.8L, but am looking for a less expensive lense that covers a similar focal length range or wider, at a lower cost.

[coldrain]

Well, there are good wide angle zoom lenses, but because of size the aperture does not go over 3.5 to 4. This may not be a problem though, since with wide angle one usually does not need a verysoft background. And you can bump the ISO up if needed,if you can not use longer shutter times with support.

The Tokina 12-24mm f4 and Canon EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM are two really good lenses, all they lack from your wish list is an aperture larger than f4.

Else you will have to look at some exotic prime that goes below 16mm and gives a larger aperture, but that will not be cheap either.

[snap]

Thanks. I had read your review of July 05 re: the Tonika. It does sound like a nice lense, and is much less expensive than the Canon 16-35 L.

[arigato]

I was having the same problem as you, finding a good wide angle lens that wouldnt hammer my budget and was faster than 4 at the wide end I settled on the Tamron SP AF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) and have been prety happy with it. Beware there seems to be 2 versions of it. Here is a link to FM's user review of that lens. It just may be the lens your looking for.


http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=245&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

[gary_hendricks]

Hi

I gotta agree with arigato. I picked up the Tamron SP AF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) recently to cover the wide end for my digital SLR. I thought about it for a while, because I was also considering the Canon 17-40L.

I was able to get the lens for $429, minus the $40 rebate which made it almost $300 less than the Canon. My first tests were done side-by-side against a friend's Canon 17-40mm L. As I looked at the 100% crops, the images were almost identical. I would say that this lens is 98% as good as the L lens.

This is great for the price. As for the real world tests, I took photos at several focal lengths and the contrast and color was really nice. This lens performs surprisingly well wide open at f2.8. It does a much better job than my Tamron 28-75mm XRDi. Image wise, very very nice.

Someone said below that this is a poor man's L lens - it is absolutely true. My only issue with this lens is that if the light is very low, it focuses very slow. Other than that, I'm happy with it. :)

I was having the same problem as you, finding a good wide angle lens that wouldnt hammer my budget and was faster than 4 at the wide end I settled on the Tamron SP AF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) and have been prety happy with it. Beware there seems to be 2 versions of it. Here is a link to FM's user review of that lens. It just may be the lens your looking for.


http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=245&sort=7&cat=43&page=1

[Bluedog]

The Canon 17-40 f/4 L is an awesome Lens. I wouldn't call it a super wide angle but 17mm is still fairly wide on the cropped sensor. Once you handle it and feel the build quality + USM and focusing speed you'll be hooked _ my copy is very sharp wide open.

[DonSchap]

If you are shooting digital... ounce for pound, the Tamron SP AF 11-18mm f/4.5-5/6 Di II LD at 12.6 ounces offer incredible super-wide angle zoom, lightweight and all at a price tag of $404.00 at Prestige Camera (2/6/2006).

http://www.prestigecamera.com/product~id~tm1118afc.htm

This has to be the buy of the month, in my estimation, and well worthy of use for the bulk of tight digital work. Like most of these particular lens, it has a 77mm filter size and no noticeble vignetting with the filter attached. I haven't tried the close-up series (+1, +2, or +4) or macro lens on it, but I suspect it will respond equally well.

The lens is smooth and relatively quick to focus, but at $400... how can you really go wrong? Even if you don't like it you can probably ebay it for more than you paid.

Use the link... and even consider:
1) the Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM for $567.00,
2) the Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X 124AF Pro DX for $413.00, or
3) the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM AF for $413.00

Personally, Tamron lenses have never done me wrong, so they get my business.

Photography Rules...

[aparmley]

Did we just witness a drop in sales pitch?

[cdifoto]

Did we just witness a drop in sales pitch?


If it smells like a duck....and walks like a duck....and quacks like a duck....it must be a sales pitch!

[Bluedog]

B]$404.00[/B] at Prestige Camera (2/6/2006).

http://www.prestigecamera.com/product~id~tm1118afc.htm

This has to be the buy of the month, in my estimation

This is from resellerratings.com:

Broadway Photo (aka: bwayphoto.com, Regal Camera, Prestige Camera, Preferred Photo)


We detected and disabled 50+ fraudulent "Very Satisfied" reviews for this merchant. Due to the continuous submission of said reviews, we are no longer accepting new reviews for this store as of 1/19/2006.

Lifetime Rating: 1.51 < on a scale of 1 being bad and 10 being good. I wouldn't trust them no matter how cheap their prices are.

[SketchySmurf]

The evils of Broadway Photo is well-documented and the monster has many faces. It's shocking to me how long they have stayed in business. Avoid these scumbags at all costs!