What's your favorite wide or ultra-wide lens on a full frame DSLR?

[Shane]

I bought a Canon 6D the other day to use for landscape photography mostly, and maybe some nighttime star photography. I need to force myself to use longer focal lengths in my landscape photography more. You can get some cool perspectives that way. But I just really love big, wide views. Maybe it's the Texas Panhandle in my blood? But I like to see all I can see of a beautiful landscape.

My Tokina 12-24mm lens is made for a crop sensor camera. At anything less than 20mm, I get vignetting on the 6D. At 12mm, it's a big black rectangle with a complete circle of light in the middle.

I need a wide angle lens that works on a full frame camera. What do you guys that shoot a full frame camera use and like?

[sierracharlie338]

That's a question out of my realm of experience but Im interested to know what the people that know what they are talking about have to say.

[WyoBull]

Shane, I shoot Nikon so probably can't help you with a specific Canon lens. That being said, I am currently still shooting my D700 full frame body and my "go to" landscape lens is the Nikon 16-35 F4 with VR. That range has been really good for me.

[Shane]

Thanks, Scott. I've been looking at a 16-35, 17-40, 14mm, 20mm and a couple others. 17mm on full frame is the same as 12mm on my crop sensor. Looking back through some of my best/favorite landscape photos from the last few years, almost all of the ones I like the best were taken with my 12-24mm Tokina at 12mm. I just like the wide views.

For landscape work, an f/4 lens is fine. I'm usually at smaller apertures anyway. I've never done a lot of astrophotography, and I probably never will do a ton of it. But f/2.8 or better would be good for that. I'm thinking about getting a 20mm f/1.8 (or 1.4) prime for the wide views. And then maybe a 17-50mm or a 24-70mm f/4 for a walk around lens. My 70-200 f/2.8 would pick it up from there.

[WyoBull]

That sounds like some good options Shane. On the Nikon side, I know a really good walk around lens is the 24-120 F4. I don't have that lens because I have the 16.35 4, 35-70 2.8 and then the 70-200 2.8 so it is hard to justify another lens spanning those same ranges.
Next on my list is a new body and I am really thinking hard about the D850.

[yaqui]

Shane, if I was in your boat, I'd go for the 20-35mm 2.8. You can find them for less than $500.00 and since you are usually stopping down, you will have good sharpness at the edges. A 16-35 is going to cost you twice that. The 14mm 2.8 starts to get little pricey. You could then also go with the fixed 20mm 1.8, the 1.4 is only a half stop difference. But I bet you will like the 20-35.

[ATX Tyler]

I just pulled the trigger on a Canon 16-35 f4. All depends on your budget, but from what I've read and seen, the 16-35 f4 is one of the sharpest wide angle Canon lenses out there without spending an absolute fortune. It's not the fastest lens, but aside from the astro photography, you'll rarely need that if you've got a tripod. It's also image stabilized if you do need to shoot it handheld to help account for it not being a 2.8.

[Legdog]

I'd check this dude out.

[ATTACH]898899[/ATTACH]

[Shane]

Cool. It doesn't look like it will accept screw-in filters though, with the lens protruding out past the rim. I like to use a polarizer outdoors. I may not be able to get everything I want in a single lens, I guess.

https://fstoppers.com/gear/sigma-14-24mm-f28-art-lens-cheaper-expected-available-pre-order-224978

[Legdog]

I have the tamron 2.8 15-30 and it also has the bubble lens. I never feel like it needs a filter (and I use polarizers a lot for other lenses). I'm pretty pleased with it but it will distort the edges. of course, this only becomes a problem with buildings and stuff that look bent. In nature, it won't be as noticeable.

[Shane]

What camera are you shooting nowadays?

[Legdog]

I'm shooting the Nikon D750

Here's a twilight shot from tonight with the Tamron.

Supposedly that sigma won't make the buildings lean. This was captured at 17mm.



f8, four seconds, 100 ISO. 17mm shutter remote

[Shane]

Nice. I don't mind the lean, personally. It's an easy fix in Lr if you want to make stuff straight anyway. The dynamic range of the newer Nikons is awesome. I just bought a Canon 6D to get that kind of DR and low noise (hopefully). Lots of people like the 6D better than the 6D Mk II. We'll see how it goes.

[Shane]

I was about to decide to buy a Canon 16-35, and then I started looking at Zeiss Distagon ZE lenses. I had a Zeiss lens a few years ago, and it was nice. I was looking at the 18mm f/3.5 and the 21mm f/2.8. I went ahead and bought the 18mm. If I decide that staying up late to take star pictures is something I want to do more of, I may swap it for the 21mm f/2.8 or get some other faster lens. But for landscapes, I think I'll love the 18mm. They're manual focus (with a focus confirmation chip) too. I won't be shooting sports with it, so I won't mind turning the focus ring. It'll be like the old 35mm Minolta SLR days.

Come on brown truck.....

[JES]

I shoot Nikon and use the 14-24, I find I use that lenses for a lot of our travel photography, I like the wide views you get from it. I also have used it to try some astrophotography, I’m still learning in that area. I mostly try it out of my ground blind window in the morning when I’m waiting for sunrise.