Should I choose a 14mm prime or an ultra-wide zoom as a travel/landscape lens for Canon APS-C?

Asked 11/29/2014

3 views

2 answers

0

I’m replacing an all-in-one zoom on a Canon T4i and mainly shoot travel memories, landscapes, and occasional close-ups of flowers. I’d like something wider than 18mm, since I often felt limited there, and I rarely used the longer end of my kit zoom. I don’t enjoy changing lenses, and my budget is about $500.

I’ve been considering lenses like the Rokinon 14mm manual-focus prime, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, and Tokina 11-16mm. I’m also thinking ahead to a possible future full-frame upgrade, though that’s a secondary concern.

My main questions are:

  • Is a 14mm manual-focus prime practical as a general travel/landscape lens on APS-C?
  • Would an ultra-wide zoom be a better choice than a 17-50mm standard zoom if my priority is getting wider coverage?
  • How much of a drawback is manual focus/manual aperture on the Rokinon for everyday shooting?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

11y ago

2 Answers

5

Have you considered the new EF-S 10-18mm f/4-5.6 STM ultrawide zoom for crop? Its MSRP is US$299, so it's about half the price of the EF-S 10-22. Sorry, but due to the crop factor, you're not going to find an ultrawide for full frame that also performs as an ultrawide for crop, and definitely not one for $500 or less.

To me, this would be a far better choice and far more practical than the Rokinon 14/2.8, which will be only as wide as 21mm equivalency on a crop (not 16mm equivalency), suffers from wave distortion, and is a manual-focus/manual-aperture lens with no electronic communication to the camera body (practical upshot: you have to shoot in M or Av, you have to manually focus, manually set the aperture, use stop-down metering, and you'll have no EXIF lens information. And a focus confirmation chip probably won't work as well as you think it will--I've found it to be relatively useless for precision manual focusing--a better focus screen or Magic Lantern's focus peaking and Magic zoom features work far better for me).

Both the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and Tokina 11-16/2.8 lenses are for crop, not full frame (Tamron's Di II, Tokina's DX, and Sigma's DC designations are similar to Canon's EF-S: the lens is designed for a smaller sensor and will vignette on a full frame, although the 3rd party lenses may still mount on full frame bodies).

Ultrawide is the one place where it make sense to rebuy glass when you move to full frame. And there's no point in compromising on a main lens you plan to use extensively for the sake of a camera you don't yet have. Unless your full frame purchase plans are imminent, go for a crop ultrawide lens.

Originally by user27440. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user27440

11y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

For your stated priorities, an ultra-wide zoom makes more sense than the Rokinon 14mm or the Tamron 17-50mm.

On APS-C, 14mm is not as extreme as it sounds on full frame, and the Rokinon’s drawbacks are significant for general use: manual focus, manual aperture, limited camera communication, and no easy filter use. It’s also less flexible than a zoom, and very wide lenses can be harder to compose with well.

The Tamron 17-50mm is a solid standard zoom, but if your main complaint is not being wide enough at 18mm, it doesn’t really solve that problem.

A better fit is an ultra-wide APS-C zoom such as a 10-18mm, 10-20mm, 11-16mm, or 12-24mm. These give you the wider view you want for landscapes, while still offering flexibility to back off from the most exaggerated perspective. For wide-angle landscape work, the slower maximum aperture on many of these zooms is usually not a major issue.

If your priority is width and convenience on your T4i, choose an ultra-wide zoom rather than a manual-focus 14mm prime.

UniqueBot

AI

11y ago

Your Answer