I couldn't decide, so I got both the 16-35 f4 is and tamron 15-30. The 2.8 makes a huge difference shooting indoor events when I can't use flash or other artificial lighting. The Canon I can use all of my existing 82mm filters.
i went for the Tamron 15-30 after watching all the review, because i do a lot of milky way shooting, and sometimes i feel that my Tamron 28-75 is not wide enough. All i all, I absolutely LOOOOVEE the image quality, but yes, it is one heavy lens.
This was a great break down. Much more real world than taking photos of a chart on the wall. Leaning towards the Canon 16-35 f2.8 or the f4. I'm steering clear of the bulbous aspherical -fixed hood assemblies as they are just too damn heavy and big and not easily (or cheaply) fixed with polarization or ND filters. Big decisions require research and great information and you have that in spades my friend. Great job👍
I thought the Tamron 15-30 f2.8 on a Nikon D750 would be to heavy, turned out to be beautifully balanced. Not having ever used a lens that wide the close focusing distance was fantastic!
bobbintonn Very interesting comment, I got a d750 as well and I am thinking about buying a ultra wide angle lens. May I ask, why you have chosen the Tamron over the legendary Nikkor 14-24mm? Would be very interesting and thanks in advance for your answer.
Simon Leuzinger the choice simply comes down to cost & that 3rd party manufacturers like Tamron & Sigma are now making good lenses , not the rubbish they once did
I use the Rokinon 14mm with a 6D for astro and it is awesome. Beats the Canon 14mm L in coma. Also have the Tokina 11-16mm with my 70D for landscapes. This setup allows me to have two cameras shoot astro at the same time if I want to since I do Milky Way timelapes.
Ian C How long do you set your shutter speed when you're doing astrophotography? Without star trails? Also, what aperture do you use? I'm new to this and getting ready to do some astro photos. I have the 16-35 Zeiss and a Sony A7R. I also have a remote that will allow me to trigger it as long as I want.
nagol5178 I use the 500 rule for full frame and you will need to use the max aperture of your lens. Ex. 500/14mm = 35.7seconds, so you shouldn't go beyound 35 seconds on 14mm. My usual settings on my 6D with the 14mm Rokinon/Samyang is f2.8, ISO 3200, 30 seconds, WB 3300K, lens manually focus to infinity. Some pointers: - Make sure to test and check the correct infinity focus point of your lens before going out to shoot. Sometimes its not where the ∞ is. This is very important since you're shooting wide open. - Shoot in RAW. You might forget to set the WB, which can easily be corrected in RAW. - DO NOT forget to cover the viewfinder, stray light can mess up your photo. - You will be working in the dark, a small red LED light can help if you want some light while the camera is clicking away. - Intervalometer needed for time lapse. It might already be integrated with the A7R. - Use the Camera Raw lens profile to correct for vignetting/distortion. Distortion can be evident if you have a straight horizon background (sea, etc.) HTH
The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 L is the Ferrari of ultra wide lenses. The Canon EF 17-40 f/4 is an aged lens. It was introduced in 2003. The recent Canon EF 16-35mm L IS is a much better choice with filter thread and has image stabilization too. The Sigma has introduced the 20mm f/1.4 lens which is a better choice than the 25 f/1.4 for those who want ultra wide and bright lenses. Ultra wide lenses give very different photos of places that are frequently shot in photos. Nearly all smartphones and compact cameras doesn't have ultra-wide lenses (with the exception of ultra wide lens adapters which destroy quality). Also all kit lenses of interchangeable lens cameras doesn't offer ultra wide focal lengths. Rectilinear ultra wide lenses give a very different perspective in photos which is very noticeable. They can be used also as portrait lenses when the background is equally important as the person. That is very good with travel portrait photos. Both the person and the sightseeing can be covered by the frame. (The fisheye lenses distort anything which is very bad for portraits but can be interesting with pets, vehicles or narrow interior places). It is easy for a manufacturer to produce reasonably priced portrait or telephoto lenses with sharp corners at maximum aperture. However ultra wide lenses are more challenging and especially ultra wide zoom lenses. It is difficult or impossible for manufacturers to produce ultra wide lenses with sharp corners and no vignetting at big apertures. That's why zoom or prime ultra wide lenses are nearly always more expensive than normal and telephoto lenses. (Super telephoto lenses with big apertures are another story.)
I've been watching a lot of comparison videos lately and 2 things about this video that I really appreciate. 1) you list the cons not just the pros for each lens. A lot of TH-cam comparisons don't factor in the weight of a lens. And 2) you Include the usage as a factor. ie: What's good for landscape isn't necessarily useful for interior work. ie: if your doing mostly Landscapes, how often are you shooting at 2.8? Most of the time f4 is going to be plenty fast enough. Fast lenses are seductive. I recent'y purchased the Sigma 50-100 f1.8. I've been regretting it ever since. I was seduced by the f1.8 factor. It's a brick! Has no VC or IS. Very difficult to use off a tripod. and I already own a 70 to 200 lens. I don't know what I was thinking. :( Again I was seduced by the speed of the lens at f1.8.
I was using a Canon 7d and the 17-55mm f/2.8.(with a Vixen tracker). But last week I added a Canon 5d mk II and the sigma 20 mm f/1.4.. Hope it was a smart choice for low light and astro-imaging ? The 14mm sigma seemed an overkill.
Hey Toby, really appreciate all the effort you put in making these videos and I have been really following your advice. I have a 70d wanted to know if there is a wide angle lens you can suggest
+Harpreet Singh Saggu Watch this one that covers wide angle for crop sensors canons, like the 70D th-cam.com/video/Lj-NIN4QhgU/w-d-xo.html also consider the very affordable 14mm f/2.8 on sale right now- facebook.com/Digital.Photo.Recommendations/posts/10153765096759855
Hi sir. I really want to see a video comparison between canon 16 35 f4 and Tamron 15 30mm g1 or g2 shooting star and Milky Way. No one has done it yet. Even canon 16 35mm f4, almost no one uses it to shoot at night.
i had the rokinon/samyang 14 and now i have the tamron 15-30mm on my d810 acording to dxomarck the rokinon/samyang is the sharpest wide angel on the marked it resolves more megapixels on my 36.3 sensor than zaiss 15MMzaiss 14mm canon and the tamron also
Love the show Toby but to put a lens down because it's auto focus. That's not a photographer-like thing to do! Now it may not be practical for some applications and hence some photographers may not want it but the lack of AF does not make it a bad lens.
I have the Rokinon 14mm. Its a great lens. Best value and quality. I got it used for $250. When you shoot wide for landscapes or interiors, you will have the time to manual focus anyways. Barrel distortion is noticeable but can be fixed in post. My next choice is the Tokina cause there is almost no distortion. The Canon 2.8 lens are overpriced, and the Tamron is just too heavy. Nice video Toby, will you have photo comparison so we can see what these lens can do ?
TOMMYBOY6969 I haven't tried one but I know they have them for my camera in FE mount. I thought about buying one back when Sony didn't have many lenses for the A7R but now they have the wide angle. I'm a Landscape Photographer so I was glad the Sony FE 16-35 Zeiss was as good as I'd hoped it would be. Plus it has image stabilization which is important as I like to do videos as well and I always buy filters for mostly that reason. The only lens I think I will need in the future is possibly a 135mm but I can settle with the 90mm, especially since it has macro. After that, I'll have all the lenses I want or will ever need. It took Sony a while though.
I never buy a lens that won't allow a filter. I like the option to do video as well as to get smooth water in long exposures. Although, I must say, my Zeiss 16-35 FE has a hard time getting the Tiffen ND variable filter on it. Because the filter is really thin. However, it goes with some effort. I've never been a fan of glass that protrudes out. The Zeiss has that kind of design on the inside of it. However, the final glass piece is flat. I don't care about built in lens hoods.
Something I've noticed with a few f/2.8 lenses for stars: They get bad coma in the corners, tamron's 24-70 was unacceptable at 2.8 the stars became seagulls and ufos, I've heard this is also a problem with canon's 16-24 f/2.8 and it doesn't clean up until you hit f/4...may as well go with the f/4 then! I liked the tokina except for all the flare I'd get from nearly any direct light source, it wasn't good for the city at night. I use the rokinon 14mm and really want to try the 20mm because it is even a wider aperture yet but has slightly less distortion.
John Bamouk I have the Tamron 15-30 now and prefer it to the rokinon for astro, it's also very sharp, doesnt flare too much and is easier to focus. Sure it doesn't have the wide apertures of rokinon's 24 or 35 but its more versitile.
Thanks for doing this video. I have a simple question. How sharp is the Canon 16-35 f2.8 wide angle list vs the typical kit 18-55 lens? Sharpness is always my concern and I feel kit lenses aren't sharp enough!
Just one question would you recommend canon 16-35 f4 for landscape sunsets? Or it’s better to go with f2.8? Would I be able to capture nice sunset with f4?
I'm looking into upgrading from my 7D to a 5D Mark III some time and I've been looking into a good ultra wide lens for it. How do you feel about the Irix 15mm? I don't mind the manual focus because I make a lot of astrophotography shots so it'll most likely sit at infinity for a while.
Hello! I am trying to get it for group portraits in a relatively close space and if possible it be good to capture the background and people in it while outdoors. Which do you recommend??? Thank you!
Hi, thanks alot for pretty useful and precise information! Can you please advice me ultrawide lens for my Canon 6D. I do event coverage, candid, and architectural photography. I have no issues for size and weight, but I don't prefer lens without autofocus like Rokinon as you showed. So, what would be the best option for me? Lastly, under 800usd. After your video, I decided to go for Canon17-40, but I will be happy to have another option! Thanks in advance!
I'm not often comment something, but this is a very Useful video. I love position of storyteller and highlighted points. It's rare when you watch BLA-BLA video with interest. BUT!! having all these in front of you and not providing us MTF 50 ealworld(better) sharpness test with different focusing distance\ field curvate test +CA test + some IS efficency test is ...hmm... BAD. Why not neccessary most important points it is quite essential for choosing UW lens.
Nice, I don't know if you have a Sony A7R, but the Zeiss 16-35 full frame is awesome. It seems to be better than the Canon, I went from Canon to the Sony.
Kind of an odd choice of Sigma prime when the 12-24 II is both full frame, wider than the rest (except the 11-24) and less than a third of the price of the new Canon.
re Tamron: If the image quality out of is excellent, why down grade it as "quite good"? You imply that there are noticeably significant advantages of image quality with the others. Pleas elaborate on that. Thanks!
@PhotoRec TV: Sony A7II user here looking for a wide angle zoom with great detail and low light performance and thinking between Canon 16-35mm F4 vs F2.8. I know the F4 is the favorite, sharper overall, and has IS but it's not as important as I have IS available in the A7II body. Wondering if the F2.8 will just be much better for lower light. Any thoughts?
+sniperv both are good but be mindful that adapted wider lenses smudge in the corners on Sony cameras. That extra stop might be useful on the 2.8. A native 16-35 G master is coming which may suit better if you have the budget - Scott
sniperv the tamron smokes them all..dont forget you have a 42 megapixel sensor and you need the best optics that s the tamron..i have it on my D 810 it s a beast better then the nikkor 14 24..believe me .
Hi, I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos. Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens. Currently there is a new player in the market. tamron 15-30mm f2.8 Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality. Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range. I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible. Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days. If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand. Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality. So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for. Thank you.
I am a bit surprised that the Sigma 18-35mm wasn't mentioned in this review. From everything that I have heard and read, it is a great lens. The two downsides I can think of is it is for crop sensor cameras only and has no IS. Other than these drawbacks, what is your opinion of this lens in comparison to the lenses in this review?
MNAviator Yes, in this review I was focused on full frame options other than the mention of the Canon 10-18. Sigma 18-35 is fantastic lens for crop sensor cameras, it does fall into the wide category but just barely.
MNAviator That lens it is more of a 28-50mm equivalent lens. Wide, but not Ultra wide, which was the subject of this video. Plus PhotoRec Toby already did another video for wide angle lenses just for crop bodies. The lenses mentioned here, would be great all around lenses (the 17-40 over all the other) on a crop body camera, since the equivalent 35mm focal length is closer to the 24-70mm field of view. But that's only if you're planning to go full frame, and actually have that amount of money to invest.
Hi, I am a novice. I will be going to photograph the Northern Lights in Iceland with my new Canon 70D. I believe that I will need a 16-35mm. I have a 16-300mm Tamron, will this do the job or do I need to buy a 16-35mm? Or what do you recommend? Thanks.
+Dominique Flack Rent the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 - That would be the best lens for your needs. The Tamron 16-300 is OK but not nearly as sharp, greater distortion and smaller apertures.
oh also, i got old 16-35 L mark i, the used of this copy was as cheap as new samyang 14mm..can u compare it?is it worth to buy samyang or save the gold for other new wide lens
Again why did you leave out from the comparison the "elephant in the room" the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Lens? You must know someone with a Nikon Body or rent one.
it is if they are both wide open. f/4 tells you how wide the opening in the diaphragm is and f/4 is exactly the same on any lens otherwise manual calculations would be impossible
+PhotoRec Toby: Hi, I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos. Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens. Currently there is a new player in the market. tamron 15-30mm f2.8 Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality. Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range. I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible. Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days. If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand. Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality. So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for. Thank you.
Toby talks a lot about hiking. Hikers are very sensitive to weight--I've seen hikers willing to pay hundreds more for a tripod just to shave off six ounces.
I agree with MNaviator, You could have include in this review the crop lens Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. It is an outstanding lens at about $900 and light compared to the FF lenses here.
tean tan Yes but this was a review of full frame wide angle lenses. I should have mentioned it in the crop section - I do have a review here th-cam.com/video/gWo3y7_8vcA/w-d-xo.html
Canon...cAnon...caNon... CANON... CAnon...canoN... I was busy typing this when PhotoRec Toby said his favorite lens would be... oddly enough, take a guess, maybe, a Canon. PhotoRec Toby... there is this company called NIKON. This company (NIKON) makes a 14-24mm f/2.8 lens which seems to be the benchmark ALL ultra wide angle lenses are measured against. This company...Nikon... also makes a two other ultra wide angle lenses, one lens is an f2.8 and the other is an f4. Both accept Nikon or aftermarket 77mm filters. However, they are not Canon lenses.
DML Channel I hear you but didn't have any Nikon bodies to test with for this review/comparison - so I limited it to Canon compatible lenses only. I do agree that the 14-24 is fantastic.
Wide angle lenses have "some landscape uses" ..."make seemingly gigantic impressive mountains look not so impressive"...this guy is on drugs. The very fact that a wide angle lens does exaggerate the far from the near is what gives mountains a sense of scale.
toby; at 4:29 is that a fruit fly smudged in the bottom left hand corner of the screen - you really need to stop drinking all that cab sauv during your post processing.
@@photorectoby all of the lenses in the list except the last Canon. Eg the rokinon takes me to b&h which says not found. On Android (Google pixel 2) in case that is relevant
@@shaunreich Ah - I just tried on my pixel and they dont work, something about the link translation. They do work fine in chrome on my laptop/desktop. I will look into it more when I get a moment.
I love my SP Tamron 15-30mm. Why? Because this lense is superb. Give me pictures with extra quality. If you will act as a pro you must buy SP Tamron 15-30mm. I recomend to visite my facebook site. Helge Larsen (the one with the red rose). Have a look on my picture album then you understand why I recomend SP Tamron 15-30mm. Landscape and night pictures. Forget the weight. You can buy yourself a carry bag. And then no problem with the weight. I use 3 lenses today. This lense and a Sigma Fullformat lence, and Tamron SP 150-600mm zoom lense mostly, and are satisfied. I own a Nikon D610. Fullformat.
![Affordable wide angle lens [Samyang 14mm review]](/img/n.gif)
I couldn't decide, so I got both the 16-35 f4 is and tamron 15-30. The 2.8 makes a huge difference shooting indoor events when I can't use flash or other artificial lighting. The Canon I can use all of my existing 82mm filters.
Image quality between the two lenses was similar? Are you still using these two lenses nowadays or you have moved on?
i went for the Tamron 15-30 after watching all the review, because i do a lot of milky way shooting, and sometimes i feel that my Tamron 28-75 is not wide enough. All i all, I absolutely LOOOOVEE the image quality, but yes, it is one heavy lens.
I absolutely love my Tamron 15-30mm on my D800! I now have the Tamron Trinity (w/24-70 + 70-200). It is all I need for my landscape photography.
Nicolaas Strik Great setup! Heavy but great :)
Took me years to learn everything you just explained here, you did a great job explaining everything!
Glad it was helpful!
This was a great break down. Much more real world than taking photos of a chart on the wall. Leaning towards the Canon 16-35 f2.8 or the f4. I'm steering clear of the bulbous aspherical -fixed hood assemblies as they are just too damn heavy and big and not easily (or cheaply) fixed with polarization or ND filters. Big decisions require research and great information and you have that in spades my friend. Great job👍
I thought the Tamron 15-30 f2.8 on a Nikon D750 would be to heavy, turned out to be beautifully balanced. Not having ever used a lens that wide the close focusing distance was fantastic!
bobbintonn Very interesting comment, I got a d750 as well and I am thinking about buying a ultra wide angle lens. May I ask, why you have chosen the Tamron over the legendary Nikkor 14-24mm?
Would be very interesting and thanks in advance for your answer.
Simon Leuzinger the choice simply comes down to cost & that 3rd party manufacturers like Tamron & Sigma are now making good lenses , not the rubbish they once did
bobbintonn see your point and thanks for your answer. Yes they have some good lenses. What is your impression on the 15-30 so far?
Yes I also use my Tamron lens for the D810 and it's really impressive that Nikon 14-24m, especially shooting at lower shutter speed with VC on 😊
I'm glad found your video regarding wide lens before invest any money. So understandable. Thank you 😊
I use the Rokinon 14mm with a 6D for astro and it is awesome. Beats the Canon 14mm L in coma. Also have the Tokina 11-16mm with my 70D for landscapes. This setup allows me to have two cameras shoot astro at the same time if I want to since I do Milky Way timelapes.
Ian C How long do you set your shutter speed when you're doing astrophotography? Without star trails? Also, what aperture do you use? I'm new to this and getting ready to do some astro photos. I have the 16-35 Zeiss and a Sony A7R. I also have a remote that will allow me to trigger it as long as I want.
nagol5178 I use the 500 rule for full frame and you will need to use the max aperture of your lens. Ex. 500/14mm = 35.7seconds, so you shouldn't go beyound 35 seconds on 14mm. My usual settings on my 6D with the 14mm Rokinon/Samyang is f2.8, ISO 3200, 30 seconds, WB 3300K, lens manually focus to infinity.
Some pointers:
- Make sure to test and check the correct infinity focus point of your lens before going out to shoot. Sometimes its not where the ∞ is. This is very important since you're shooting wide open.
- Shoot in RAW. You might forget to set the WB, which can easily be corrected in RAW.
- DO NOT forget to cover the viewfinder, stray light can mess up your photo.
- You will be working in the dark, a small red LED light can help if you want some light while the camera is clicking away.
- Intervalometer needed for time lapse. It might already be integrated with the A7R.
- Use the Camera Raw lens profile to correct for vignetting/distortion. Distortion can be evident if you have a straight horizon background (sea, etc.)
HTH
Very very good and comprehensive review and analysis and for a novice I really appreciated this information - great job.
The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 L is the Ferrari of ultra wide lenses.
The Canon EF 17-40 f/4 is an aged lens. It was introduced in 2003. The recent Canon EF 16-35mm L IS is a much better choice with filter thread and has image stabilization too.
The Sigma has introduced the 20mm f/1.4 lens which is a better choice than the 25 f/1.4 for those who want ultra wide and bright lenses.
Ultra wide lenses give very different photos of places that are frequently shot in photos.
Nearly all smartphones and compact cameras doesn't have ultra-wide lenses (with the exception of ultra wide lens adapters which destroy quality). Also all kit lenses of interchangeable lens cameras doesn't offer ultra wide focal lengths.
Rectilinear ultra wide lenses give a very different perspective in photos which is very noticeable. They can be used also as portrait lenses when the background is equally important as the person. That is very good with travel portrait photos. Both the person and the sightseeing can be covered by the frame. (The fisheye lenses distort anything which is very bad for portraits but can be interesting with pets, vehicles or narrow interior places).
It is easy for a manufacturer to produce reasonably priced portrait or telephoto lenses with sharp corners at maximum aperture. However ultra wide lenses are more challenging and especially ultra wide zoom lenses. It is difficult or impossible for manufacturers to produce ultra wide lenses with sharp corners and no vignetting at big apertures. That's why zoom or prime ultra wide lenses are nearly always more expensive than normal and telephoto lenses. (Super telephoto lenses with big apertures are another story.)
This is quite decidedly the best and most comprehensive review/analysis I've ever seen. Wonderful work. Thanks!
+davepottage Thank you!
I've been watching a lot of comparison videos lately and 2 things about this video that I really appreciate. 1) you list the cons not just the pros for each lens. A lot of TH-cam comparisons don't factor in the weight of a lens. And 2) you Include the usage as a factor. ie: What's good for landscape isn't necessarily useful for interior work. ie: if your doing mostly Landscapes, how often are you shooting at 2.8? Most of the time f4 is going to be plenty fast enough. Fast lenses are seductive. I recent'y purchased the Sigma 50-100 f1.8. I've been regretting it ever since. I was seduced by the f1.8 factor. It's a brick! Has no VC or IS. Very difficult to use off a tripod. and I already own a 70 to 200 lens. I don't know what I was thinking. :( Again I was seduced by the speed of the lens at f1.8.
I was using a Canon 7d and the 17-55mm f/2.8.(with a Vixen tracker). But last week I added a Canon 5d mk II and the sigma 20 mm f/1.4.. Hope it was a smart choice for low light and astro-imaging ? The 14mm sigma seemed an overkill.
Thank you for this usefull video. What do you think about the canon ef 20 - 35mm f3.5-4.5 in IQ?
This is an amazing review, probably the best UVA one I've watched.Thanks for the effort!
Very good review man, thanks so much!
Just came across your video, extremely good examples and well put together!!!
Hey Toby, really appreciate all the effort you put in making these videos and I have been really following your advice. I have a 70d wanted to know if there is a wide angle lens you can suggest
+Harpreet Singh Saggu Watch this one that covers wide angle for crop sensors canons, like the 70D th-cam.com/video/Lj-NIN4QhgU/w-d-xo.html also consider the very affordable 14mm f/2.8 on sale right now- facebook.com/Digital.Photo.Recommendations/posts/10153765096759855
+Harpreet Singh Saggu Tokina 11-16 latest edition is superb for that camera. I had that combo my self.
Harpreet Singh Saggu canon s 10 20mm..it s the best i had it when i was shooting with the 70d..
I like the Laowa 15mm f/4 lens better for that purpose because I get great visuals on my D500.
Some great explanations...Well done overall! Oh, and some great photos.
Thanks Phil! Much appreciated.
The rokinon/samyang 14 has auto aperture, so you still have metering. And it is a sharp beastie!
Zoe Bazilchuk Thanks Zoe - I will add a note to the video.
PhotoRec Toby AFAIK it's only for the Nikon version
Awesome Information! How about the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM lens? I currently own a Canon 5D Mark iii
Hi sir. I really want to see a video comparison between canon 16 35 f4 and Tamron 15 30mm g1 or g2 shooting star and Milky Way. No one has done it yet. Even canon 16 35mm f4, almost no one uses it to shoot at night.
i had the rokinon/samyang 14 and now i have the tamron 15-30mm on my d810 acording to dxomarck the rokinon/samyang is the sharpest wide angel on the marked it resolves more megapixels on my 36.3 sensor than zaiss 15MMzaiss 14mm canon and the tamron also
Love the show Toby but to put a lens down because it's auto focus. That's not a photographer-like thing to do! Now it may not be practical for some applications and hence some photographers may not want it but the lack of AF does not make it a bad lens.
I have the Rokinon 14mm. Its a great lens. Best value and quality. I got it used for $250. When you shoot wide for landscapes or interiors, you will have the time to manual focus anyways. Barrel distortion is noticeable but can be fixed in post. My next choice is the Tokina cause there is almost no distortion. The Canon 2.8 lens are overpriced, and the Tamron is just too heavy. Nice video Toby, will you have photo comparison so we can see what these lens can do ?
TOMMYBOY6969 I haven't tried one but I know they have them for my camera in FE mount. I thought about buying one back when Sony didn't have many lenses for the A7R but now they have the wide angle. I'm a Landscape Photographer so I was glad the Sony FE 16-35 Zeiss was as good as I'd hoped it would be. Plus it has image stabilization which is important as I like to do videos as well and I always buy filters for mostly that reason. The only lens I think I will need in the future is possibly a 135mm but I can settle with the 90mm, especially since it has macro. After that, I'll have all the lenses I want or will ever need. It took Sony a while though.
I never buy a lens that won't allow a filter. I like the option to do video as well as to get smooth water in long exposures. Although, I must say, my Zeiss 16-35 FE has a hard time getting the Tiffen ND variable filter on it. Because the filter is really thin. However, it goes with some effort. I've never been a fan of glass that protrudes out. The Zeiss has that kind of design on the inside of it. However, the final glass piece is flat. I don't care about built in lens hoods.
Something I've noticed with a few f/2.8 lenses for stars: They get bad coma in the corners, tamron's 24-70 was unacceptable at 2.8 the stars became seagulls and ufos, I've heard this is also a problem with canon's 16-24 f/2.8 and it doesn't clean up until you hit f/4...may as well go with the f/4 then! I liked the tokina except for all the flare I'd get from nearly any direct light source, it wasn't good for the city at night. I use the rokinon 14mm and really want to try the 20mm because it is even a wider aperture yet but has slightly less distortion.
Charles Talhelm rokinon is the best for astrophotography..it s not a secret..but for anything else the Tamron 15 30 is really a beast.
John Bamouk I have the Tamron 15-30 now and prefer it to the rokinon for astro, it's also very sharp, doesnt flare too much and is easier to focus. Sure it doesn't have the wide apertures of rokinon's 24 or 35 but its more versitile.
Why'd he not mention the rear filters you can use on the Tamron lens?
Thanks for doing this video. I have a simple question. How sharp is the Canon 16-35 f2.8 wide angle list vs the typical kit 18-55 lens? Sharpness is always my concern and I feel kit lenses aren't sharp enough!
What did you end up buying? How was the image sharpness for you?
Great review and really appreciate the good info concerning video.
frankly, rokinon 14mm 2.8 at $350 blows all these wides away. sure you have to focus manually but those images are stunning.
Just one question would you recommend canon 16-35 f4 for landscape sunsets? Or it’s better to go with f2.8? Would I be able to capture nice sunset with f4?
I found this photography lens review very competent!!!
I'm looking into upgrading from my 7D to a 5D Mark III some time and I've been looking into a good ultra wide lens for it. How do you feel about the Irix 15mm? I don't mind the manual focus because I make a lot of astrophotography shots so it'll most likely sit at infinity for a while.
Hi there!
Have you done an ultra wide- angle lens review of the best lens for crop sensor cameras such as the new 80d and the 70d etc.
Thanks!
th-cam.com/video/Lj-NIN4QhgU/w-d-xo.html here is a comparison between our favourite UWA APS-C lenses - Scott
Hello! I am trying to get it for group portraits in a relatively close space and if possible it be good to capture the background and people in it while outdoors. Which do you recommend??? Thank you!
Hi, thanks alot for pretty useful and precise information! Can you please advice me ultrawide lens for my Canon 6D. I do event coverage, candid, and architectural photography. I have no issues for size and weight, but I don't prefer lens without autofocus like Rokinon as you showed. So, what would be the best option for me? Lastly, under 800usd.
After your video, I decided to go for Canon17-40, but I will be happy to have another option!
Thanks in advance!
Where is Tokina 11-16mm :o ??? This is best Man !
I'm not often comment something, but this is a very Useful video. I love position of storyteller and highlighted points. It's rare when you watch BLA-BLA video with interest.
BUT!! having all these in front of you and not providing us MTF 50
ealworld(better) sharpness test with different focusing distance\ field curvate test +CA test + some IS efficency test is ...hmm... BAD.
Why not neccessary most important points it is quite essential for choosing UW lens.
+Serhiy Lviv I am more interested in how lenses perform in the real world - that's where I use a lens. Thanks
What about the Tamron 15-30mm IQ across the frame vs the FE 16-35mm F4 on my A7ii?
shaolin95 whitout any doubt the tamron is the winner here.it can t be another opinion.
Great review and well done!!
Thanks for review Toby.
Nice, I don't know if you have a Sony A7R, but the Zeiss 16-35 full frame is awesome. It seems to be better than the Canon, I went from Canon to the Sony.
Very interesting, great review !
thanks boss i like Tamron 15-30mm
Kind of an odd choice of Sigma prime when the 12-24 II is both full frame, wider than the rest (except the 11-24) and less than a third of the price of the new Canon.
Erik Nyberg I agree- I had it and threw it in there for a quick comparison.
Thank you man......................, I will go for 16-35 f4 , canon.
Fahad B. Sakhawat Good choice!
re Tamron: If the image quality out of is excellent, why down grade it as "quite good"? You imply that there are noticeably significant advantages of image quality with the others. Pleas elaborate on that. Thanks!
UnknownHandle UnknownHandle cause he s a canon guy..that s all.the Tamron smokes them all in all aspects..I use it on my D 810 and it s a killer.
11:46 fruit fly is back just to the right of "vignette at f/4"
@PhotoRec TV: Sony A7II user here looking for a wide angle zoom with great detail and low light performance and thinking between Canon 16-35mm F4 vs F2.8. I know the F4 is the favorite, sharper overall, and has IS but it's not as important as I have IS available in the A7II body. Wondering if the F2.8 will just be much better for lower light. Any thoughts?
+sniperv both are good but be mindful that adapted wider lenses smudge in the corners on Sony cameras. That extra stop might be useful on the 2.8.
A native 16-35 G master is coming which may suit better if you have the budget - Scott
sniperv the tamron smokes them all..dont forget you have a 42 megapixel sensor and you need the best optics that s the tamron..i have it on my D 810 it s a beast better then the nikkor 14 24..believe me .
Great presentation.
if you are looking for a good affordable filter system for the tamron, look up HAIDA on amazon
Hi,
I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos.
Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens.
Currently there is a new player in the market.
tamron 15-30mm f2.8
Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality.
Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range.
I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible.
Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days.
If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand.
Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality.
So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for.
Thank you.
Can u campare 16-35 f2. 8 and f4 is with some sample photos..
I am a bit surprised that the Sigma 18-35mm wasn't mentioned in this review. From everything that I have heard and read, it is a great lens. The two downsides I can think of is it is for crop sensor cameras only and has no IS. Other than these drawbacks, what is your opinion of this lens in comparison to the lenses in this review?
MNAviator Yes, in this review I was focused on full frame options other than the mention of the Canon 10-18. Sigma 18-35 is fantastic lens for crop sensor cameras, it does fall into the wide category but just barely.
MNAviator That lens it is more of a 28-50mm equivalent lens. Wide, but not Ultra wide, which was the subject of this video. Plus PhotoRec Toby already did another video for wide angle lenses just for crop bodies.
The lenses mentioned here, would be great all around lenses (the 17-40 over all the other) on a crop body camera, since the equivalent 35mm focal length is closer to the 24-70mm field of view. But that's only if you're planning to go full frame, and actually have that amount of money to invest.
For everyone looking for Tobys astro photography blog-post, there you go: photorec.tv/2013/08/photographing-the-perseids-meteor-shower/
Hi, I am a novice. I will be going to photograph the Northern Lights in Iceland with my new Canon 70D. I believe that I will need a 16-35mm. I have a 16-300mm Tamron, will this do the job or do I need to buy a 16-35mm? Or what do you recommend? Thanks.
+Dominique Flack Rent the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 - That would be the best lens for your needs. The Tamron 16-300 is OK but not nearly as sharp, greater distortion and smaller apertures.
+PhotoRec Toby Thank you so much for your help and expertise.
Excellent review
Thanks!
Should have added Nikon 16-35mm. . . to your test.
hi..can u make more review comparing these lenses with samyang 14mm and sigma 20mm Art?
oh also, i got old 16-35 L mark i, the used of this copy was as cheap as new samyang 14mm..can u compare it?is it worth to buy samyang or save the gold for other new wide lens
oh wow,got some answer here th-cam.com/video/XTGUuIzGyIg/w-d-xo.htmlm10s
13:10
He's talking about 24 mm and not 20 mm
Again why did you leave out from the comparison the "elephant in the room" the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Lens? You must know someone with a Nikon Body or rent one.
Great vid
If i got a f2.8 lens set at f4 and a f4 lens set at f4 will there be difference in exposure ?
+ronnie tjikoeri No, the exposure should be the same
+Jim Titheridge ok thnx, i was under the impression that a f4 lens would be more dim
it is if they are both wide open. f/4 tells you how wide the opening in the diaphragm is and f/4 is exactly the same on any lens otherwise manual calculations would be impossible
Thnx for clearing that up, i was shooting a 2,8 prime at f4 and switched to a wideangle zoom that was f4 wide open
everyone complaining about the weight LOL not that heavy if you work out
What is your thoughts on Sigmas 24-35?
+PhotoRec Toby:
Hi,
I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos.
Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens.
Currently there is a new player in the market.
tamron 15-30mm f2.8
Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality.
Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range.
I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible.
Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days.
If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand.
Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality.
So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for.
Thank you.
The Canon man through and through
I was :)
Sigma 20mm f/1.4 ?
I love the sigma 20 f/1.4 for photos and astrophotography - at the time I made this review it was just a dream in Sigma's eye ;)
I can not make sense out of that a lens is not preferred because it is only heavy. Just because of that silly reason, Tamron is not a Winner(!!!)
Look at him, he's so skinny that Tamron lens could have thrown him off the road.
Toby talks a lot about hiking. Hikers are very sensitive to weight--I've seen hikers willing to pay hundreds more for a tripod just to shave off six ounces.
I agree with MNaviator,
You could have include in this review the crop lens Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. It is an outstanding lens at about $900 and light compared to the FF lenses here.
tean tan Yes but this was a review of full frame wide angle lenses. I should have mentioned it in the crop section - I do have a review here th-cam.com/video/gWo3y7_8vcA/w-d-xo.html
Canon...cAnon...caNon... CANON... CAnon...canoN... I was busy typing this when PhotoRec Toby said his favorite lens would be... oddly enough, take a guess, maybe, a Canon.
PhotoRec Toby... there is this company called NIKON. This company (NIKON) makes a 14-24mm f/2.8 lens which seems to be the benchmark ALL ultra wide angle lenses are measured against.
This company...Nikon... also makes a two other ultra wide angle lenses, one lens is an f2.8 and the other is an f4. Both accept Nikon or aftermarket 77mm filters.
However, they are not Canon lenses.
DML Channel I hear you but didn't have any Nikon bodies to test with for this review/comparison - so I limited it to Canon compatible lenses only. I do agree that the 14-24 is fantastic.
Wohoo new video =)
Using a Ultrawide in APS-C is ..... hilarious
Wide angle lenses have "some landscape uses" ..."make seemingly gigantic impressive mountains look not so impressive"...this guy is on drugs. The very fact that a wide angle lens does exaggerate the far from the near is what gives mountains a sense of scale.
toby; at 4:29 is that a fruit fly smudged in the bottom left hand corner of the screen - you really need to stop drinking all that cab sauv during your post processing.
All of your lens links are broken dude
I just checked and they all worked - which one are you trying to use?
@@photorectoby all of the lenses in the list except the last Canon. Eg the rokinon takes me to b&h which says not found. On Android (Google pixel 2) in case that is relevant
@@shaunreich Ah - I just tried on my pixel and they dont work, something about the link translation. They do work fine in chrome on my laptop/desktop. I will look into it more when I get a moment.
I love my SP Tamron 15-30mm. Why? Because this lense is superb. Give me pictures with extra quality. If you will act as a pro you must buy SP Tamron 15-30mm. I recomend to visite my facebook site. Helge Larsen (the one with the red rose). Have a look on my picture album then you understand why I recomend SP Tamron 15-30mm. Landscape and night pictures. Forget the weight. You can buy yourself a carry bag. And then no problem with the weight. I use 3 lenses today. This lense and a Sigma Fullformat lence, and Tamron SP 150-600mm zoom lense mostly, and are satisfied. I own a Nikon D610. Fullformat.
gime your Facebook please
Sony 16-35 f/.2.8 SSM II Nothing else matters!
You keep your manual focus ONLY lenses, thats why i paid for auto focus cameras, so i could manual focus......NUTS!