which lens give better shots for dslr 30d ?
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM Lens
or
Canon EFS 10-22mm F3.5-5.6 USM Lens
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM Lens
or
Canon EFS 10-22mm F3.5-5.6 USM Lens
wide angle lens for dslr 30d
- Thread starter kalimantan
- Start date
- Status
Actually 2 lens are diff. 10-22 is very wide, good for landscape and creative shot, but if you want to shoot event most of the time with people portrait. get the 16-35. Depend on what you want, if have $$ get both since these lenses compliment each other.
You need both :lovegrin:
but if you want landscape mainly.. 10-22 will be your answer.. That focal length not for portrait
but if you want landscape mainly.. 10-22 will be your answer.. That focal length not for portrait
say i m taking landscape and subject face together and subject is in front of landscape or besides the landscape, so what would be the choice ?
if "purely" landscape with no subject, 10-22 will be fine.
if "purely" landscape with no subject, 10-22 will be fine.
ask yourself if 16mm is wide enough on your 30D... and you don't need so wide... go test it out... if yes, go for 16-35MII :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I ended up getting both for different applications.. 16-35 is one great lens for wedding coverage.. esp in tight setup on a 30D
10-22mm for pure wide angle.. great for landscapes...
16-35 if u want a more general range, something like a walkaround lens...
if u use 10-22 for environmental portraits it'll be very good too.. just that at the very wide ends u might get distortion... personally i'd still go with the 10-22...
16-35 if u want a more general range, something like a walkaround lens...
if u use 10-22 for environmental portraits it'll be very good too.. just that at the very wide ends u might get distortion... personally i'd still go with the 10-22...
I have both 10-22 and 17-40 (16-35 is only slightly wider)
The diff between 10 and 16 is quite a lot so it all depends how wide you need to get.
Both are very good and also expensive lenses.
The diff between 10 and 16 is quite a lot so it all depends how wide you need to get.
Both are very good and also expensive lenses.
Just ask yourself if you need a fast lens. If yes, go for the 16-35 f/2.8 II. If not, the 17-40 f/4 will be just as good.
:bsmilie: nice piece of advise for pple who dont want to change lenses
10-22 is great if you want to show others the scenary/landscape which you liked.. but beware if you shoot people with carelessness.. it might become funny.. 10-22 is great lens.. i have it on 400d..
The price of this lens have drop alot. Personally I dun feel it is worth that price (between 1.4 - 1.6k) Rather you get the 17-40 F4.
Review for this lens not so good from the net.
No matter what it is... if you stick on to 1.6x, you will definitely come back to 10-22 one day... 10mm perpective really makes you drool.. trust me :bsmilie:
If you have the intention to upgrade to full frame body later, I would advise you to get 16-35, because 10-22 is EFS mount, cannot be used on full frame body.
Forget about FF or not FF bro... that might be a year or 2 time if you really want to upgrade... you can always sell the 10-22 away when moving to FF... What's impt now is to shoot shoot shoot :lovegrin: I regret consider too long and eventually still get the 10-22 and I am enjoying it every moment on my 30D... Yes, I will definitely go FF (soon)... but 10-22 is one great lens that is easy to sell You don't see so many copies out there in B&S... most owners are keeping this gem :thumbsup:
You don't see so many copies out there in B&S... most owners are keeping this gem :thumbsup:i had just bought these len for my 3yr old 20d, i keep telling myself to wait for full frame.
but its seem too long,wasted 3yr of wide angle shot on my 20d.Here are some test shot of
this baby.
but its seem too long,wasted 3yr of wide angle shot on my 20d.Here are some test shot of
this baby.
- Status
Similar threads
