Wide-Angle Lens

[photoman17]

I just purchased the 40D kit with the 28-135mm IS lens. Now, I'm not sure if I made it mistake. Would it have been better to have started with a wide-angle lens, such as the 17-55mm or 17-85mm. I understand that because of Canon's 1.6x crop factor, I would need a 17mm focal length to produce the 28mm equivalent from 35mm film. How important is a wide-angle lens for my entry into the dSLR world? Is the 28-135mm sufficient to start, or do I need to immediately purchase a wide-angle lens? Thanks.

[expensive_hobby]

Congrats on the new toy! I'm not an expert by far, but I would say what you have will be great and useful!

[aam1234]

Imo, I think you might want to stick with what you have for a while then you will know what you really need. Again, this is my opinion.

[photoman17]

Originally Posted by aam1234

Imo, I think you might want to stick with what you have for a while then you will know what you really need. Again, this is my opinion.

I think you're right. It's just that I read about the 28mm end being too tight and got worried. I travel a lot and like to take pictures of landscapes/scenery. Not sure how much of a difference the 17mm will make over the 28mm, but I got a bit worried.

[musicman5]

The 28-135 is a great starter lens and if you find it's not wide enough you can add the Canon 10-22mm or the Sigma 10-20mm. I don't own either but I hear they are both great landscape lenses.

[Max@Home]

Originally Posted by photoman17

I just purchased the 40D kit with the 28-135mm IS lens. Now, I'm not sure if I made it mistake. Would it have been better to have started with a wide-angle lens, such as the 17-55mm or 17-85mm. I understand that because of Canon's 1.6x crop factor, I would need a 17mm focal length to produce the 28mm equivalent from 35mm film. How important is a wide-angle lens for my entry into the dSLR world? Is the 28-135mm sufficient to start, or do I need to immediately purchase a wide-angle lens? Thanks.

The 28-135 ain't bad at all, but not too wide and is a tad slow for inside.

I agree with others: first go and shoot this lens, then see what you really miss, and make far more informed purchases later.

If however you immediately want to experiment with 'wider' and/or 'faster': the 'old' (non-IS) kitlens, EF-S18-55F3.5-F5.6 II (USM ?? would be the nicer one to have...) and the EF50F1.8II can be found for ~$75 a piece on EBay, or for ~$100 new... small prices to pay for really usefull ('practice & learn') lenses...

...just *my* opinion, *my* €0.02 worth...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[Sparky98]

I purchased the same kit and I am pretty happy with the 28-135 lens. I don't have a problem with the FOV of the 28-135 and it works fine for me as a walk around lens. I also purchsed the EF-S 10-22 and the EF 100-400 L and I can definitely tell the difference in the way they handle. The 28-135 is not built as well as my other lenses and my copy makes a lot of noise focusing but overall it is a good lens and it is inexpensive.

Use the 28-135 for a while and if you find you are constantly having to back up to get the shot you want then you may want to look into a WA lens.

[photoman17]

Originally Posted by Sparky98

Use the 28-135 for a while and if you find you are constantly having to back up to get the shot you want then you may want to look into a WA lens.

You're absolutely right, that's exactly what I'll do. Thanks.

[richardpcrowe]

A lens that starts at 17mm or especially one starting around 10-12mm certainly will give you a wide view than the 28mm lens.

Many photographers knock zoom lenses that start at 24mm to 28mm on 1.6x cameras because "they aren't wide enough". However many photographers are happy with their ultra-wide lenses producing dull boring and uninteresting images. Certainly, not all photographers who use wide lenses are guilty of this but, IMO a large proportion of images shot with wide lenses can be dumped into the lack of interest category.

Often, the inclusion of a prominent foreground object can achieve interest in an otherwise dull wide angle shot however, only a limited number of photographers use their wide lenses in this fashion. The consensus seems to be - "I'll shoot everything out there with the hope that there might be something of interest in my shot!"

IMO a panorama shot with a longer focal length (especially one which is shot with the camera in portrait position) is often more interesting than the equivalent image shot with a wide angle lens. Here is an excellent example:

Re: true wide-angle versus stiched panorama: Open Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Granted, you cannot shoot all images with the stitched pano technique but, that technique is well adapted to most landscapes. You will need a tripod but the tripod doesn't need to be the most expensive kind. Just get one that is relatively sturdy; since you will most likely be shooting somewhere around 1/100 second at f/16 (sunny days) if you use ISO 100.

Putting a pano together, once it is shot correctly is very easy and the results can be awesome. See Max Lyon's site for some truly great panoramas.

Max Lyons Digital Image Gallery

[wookiee2cu]

The 28-135 IS is a good all around lens, especially considering it has IS and if you got it as a package deal from B&H you pretty much end up getting it for about $101 (listed at $339 by itself). For wide angle lens, I'd either go with the Canon 10-22 or the Tokina 12-24. My buddy has the 10-22 ($639)and I have the Tokina ($499), both are great glass. I went with the Tokina mainly because I have the 10D so the 10-22 was not an option (just ordered the 40D last night). I read a ton of reviews and the Tokina seemed to have better reviews than the Sigma. Another lens to keep in mind is the Canon 50 f/1.8 which has nicknames such as fantastic plastic. This lens will run you around $80 and is great for low light situations and wide apertures.

As far as how important is a wide angle lens, this all depends on what type of photography you do. Once you get one though, it will probably become one of your favorite lens; I know my Tokina is. You will be amazed how much more of the image you can capture which comes in very handy if shooting indoors or areas with limited space.

[cskn0125]

It's not important to have a wide angle when starting, or ever - unless you need it. What you have is perfect for starting out. imo, a 28-135 is going to be one of the better beginner lenses for anything from portraiture to walk around street shots - which is what newer people seem to do most.

Good luck!

[PhotoDim]

Originally Posted by cskn0125

It's not important to have a wide angle when starting, or ever - unless you need it. What you have is perfect for starting out. imo, a 28-135 is going to be one of the better beginner lenses for anything from portraiture to walk around street shots - which is what newer people seem to do most.

Good luck!

That's quite true. Thanks, you just reassured me as I have purchased the same kit.