Which ultra-wide lens for a Canon 6D Mark II is best for landscapes and astrophotography?
Asked 7/3/2020
1 views
2 answers
0
I use a Canon 6D Mark II and already have a Canon 24-70mm f/4 and a Tamron 70-210mm f/4. I want to add an ultra-wide lens mainly for landscapes, but I also want to shoot astrophotography, so I’m considering something fast rather than an f/4 zoom. I’ve looked at the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 and Canon 16-35mm f/4, but I’m concerned about astro performance and also the cost/limitations of external filter systems on lenses with bulbous front elements. I’m open to Canon or third-party options. What lenses should I consider, and how important is filter compatibility versus maximum aperture for this kind of use?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
6y ago
2 Answers
4
Astrophotography
The popular astrophotography lenses for full-frame cameras have typically been the 14mm Samyang/Rokinon lenses. Those are completely manual lenses. For astrophotography that's not an issue since you can't use auto-focus on stars anyway. These used to be f/2.8, but they now make an f/2.4 version as well.
Astrophotography and Landscape
For a more general purpose ultra-wide lens, Sigma makes a 14mm f/1.8 Art lens. It's a bit more expensive (around $1600 USD), but it is does have auto-focus & aperture -- and it is an f/1.8 lens. Since you plan to use the lens for daytime landscape as well as nighttime astrophotography, having auto-focus & aperture makes it a bit more versatile. (This would probably be my personal choice if I were to buy a new lens today.)
Thoughts & Consideration
The Samyang/Rokinon lenses used to have a somewhat common quality issue with "de-centered" optics (I use quotes because I suspect it may be non-orthogonal optics). In any lens, the field isn't actually "flat". There's some field curvature and that means if you achieve your best focus at the center of frame then inspect the corners, you'll notice the corners aren't quite as sharp as the center ... but each corner will be about the same as any other corner. On some Samyang/Rokinon copies, some corners were noticeably worse than others. It's been a few years and they may have (hopefully) corrected the quality issus. If you do decide to go for Samyang/Rokinon, give the lens a test when it arrives to make sure you have a good copy.
When doing astrophotography, some photographers pick a star about 1/3rd of the way into the frame to use for focus ... instead of a star in the center. This somewhat helps to average the focus quality across the frame so the corners don't look as soft (the center isn't as tack-sharp, but the corners aren't nearly so obviously soft). Also, Stopping down slightly will help dramatically with coma and astigmatism.
Tilt-Shift (Landscape)
I would be remiss if I didn't mention tilt-shift lenses. These are lenses that are especially versatile for landscape (and architecture but you are interested in landscape). The lenses allow you to change the plane of focus so it isn't orthogonal to the optical axis of the lens. Here's why that can be helpful.
Suppose it's a rather breezy day and you'd like to capture a field of flowers. But the flowers are blowing in the wind. This means you'll need a fast shutter speed to avoid them being blurred. But you find that when you try to use a fast shutter speed, you have to open up the aperture and now the depth of field wont let you get sharp focus across the entire field from near to far.
A tilt shift lens, would let you tilt the focal plane to match the field while still letting you shoot with a wide aperture so you can use a fast shutter speed -- freezing the action and getting sharp focus from front to back with no motion blur.
These are completely manual lenses, tend to be expensive, and have a bit of a learning curve to understand and master how to use the tilt feature.
These lenses don't have any advantages for astrophotography, but since you primarily asked about a landscape lens, I wouldn't feel an answer is complete without at least mentioning them and when/why they are useful.
Originally by user82237. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user82237
6y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For full-frame landscape + astro, the tradeoff is mainly speed versus filter convenience.
For astrophotography, faster lenses are strongly preferred, so f/2.8 or faster is more appealing than an f/4 zoom. A commonly recommended budget-friendly astro option is the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm, available around f/2.8 and f/2.4. It’s manual focus, but that’s usually fine for stars.
If you want a more versatile lens for both daytime landscapes and astro, the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 Art stands out. It adds autofocus and aperture control for general use, while being much faster for night skies.
If you prefer a zoom, the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 Art is highly regarded for sharpness, controlled distortion, and acceptable coma in the corners, making it a strong wide-angle landscape/astro choice.
The main caution with lenses like the Tamron 15-30mm and Sigma 14-24mm is the bulbous front element: they typically need special filter systems rather than standard screw-in filters. So if you rely heavily on filters, that matters a lot.
In short: prioritize a fast lens for astro; prioritize regular filter use for daytime landscape convenience.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI6y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Which Canon 60D lenses and accessories will work on a 6D Mark II?
Which wide, fast lens should I buy for group photos in tight spaces on a Canon 5D Mark III?
Should I use a slim circular polarizer on an 11-16mm wide-angle lens, and are Cokin ND filters worth it?
Why are very fast ultra-wide lenses rare, and are there Canon-compatible options faster than f/2.8?
Can I use my Canon Rebel EF-S 18-55mm and EF 75-300mm lenses on an EOS 7D Mark II?