What do you all think is the best available wide angle lens? What makes it the best? What about focal length? What is the aperture range? Why do you love yours?

Would love opinions!

Ksenia

Two choices for "best" as far as wide zooms.

Canon 16-35 2.8 L The best because it's 2.8 and it's L! It's $1600ish last I looked.
Tokina 12-24mm F4 Second best - it's a huge wide angle at 12mm and at 12mm F4 isn't much of a problem. All I need is like 1/15 or 1/20 to handhold which F4 can easily achieve most of the time.

Next-best would be the Canon 10-22mm EF-s. And the reason Tokina wins is EF-s. It's not useful on the "pro" Canons.

I know nothing about Nikon really so that's all Canon related.

Zeiss Distagon T* ZM 15mm f/2.8

I "settled" for the Canon 16-35L F/2.8. I was originally considering the 17-40 as I don't shoot wide that often, but I found a desperate seller in France with a used copy and sold it to me for $800 shipped overnight.

I am about to buy a Tamron 11-18. Anyone of thoughts on this lens? I have used the Canon 10-22 ef-s and it is really awesome.

If the 16-35 is out of your budget then try 17-40. I used to own a 20mm prime 2.8, but I sold it b/c it wasn't that wide on a 1.6 crop camera. But it was a very nice lens and very afordable, about 400 dollars.

How wide? I shoot my 24-70 at 35mm a good 60% of the time so I am getting the 35 1.4L (after I get another body). It is considered by many as one of Canons top 3 lenses. I shot a Leica as a play camera for a couple of years with a 35mm and loved it, I think that is why that angle on a 5D looks so good to me.

Depends on talking about full-frame or not.

For digital only, the 10-22 is an amazing lens. I never take it off my 20D.

For full-frame I would want a 15mm fisheye.

17-55/2.8 Nikkor, baby. Nothin' can touch it. Yeah!

OK, I have no idea about the Canon lenses people wrote about above. If you only want to have two lenses, this is one of them. I think Canon has one but from what I've heard it's not built all that well. It does have IS, though.

I really like what Ken Rockwell has to say-
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wi.../comparison.htm

He does not consider Canon's 10-whatever wide zoom, but I hear that's an excellent lens.

Personally I'm going to be getting the Tokina 12-24 in a few months - I think that's the best value for me. I'll post a review when I get it.

Please note, those lenses are not designed for full-frame sensors.

Nikkor??? Is that some cheap third party lens for Canons?

We like the Canon 16-35/2.8 very very much. Huy

THE best (depending on just how wide you want) is the Carl Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon.

And at ~$3000 you'll pay a premium for it.

Some 17-40L's, some 16-35L's, and most 10-22 EF-S's are quite good, too.

I love the 17-55 2.8 IS for my 20d! Check out user opinion below:Fred Miranda review of 17-55mm 2.8 IS

For goodness sakes this baby has IS!! The f stop is 2.8 but with IS it's like going down 3 more stops! Just a note of reminder that if you have a camera higher than the 20d this lens will not be compatible with those. (e.g. 5d, Mark II etc...) Just make sure to double check that the lens is compatible with the camera you are using.

I recommend the 16-35mm f/2.8 ($1350) and 17-40mm f/4 ($760). It's very verseatile to use a zoom over a prime, because things distort very quickly on the wide end and time can be of the essence. These lenses were designed with a full frame in mind, but that's where they're the most impressive.

Another wide angle that I recommend is the 15mm fisheye ($590). This is definitely more of a specialty lens, though, because I imagine that clients may quickly tire of the effect.

I've heard alot of people say good things about the tokina 12-24, but I've never been to fussed when I look at the samples.

what do people think of the sigma 10-20?

I heard Sigma is not a great company to buy from b/c their customer service is horrible. Canon will repair your stuff very quickly. I was told by a camera salesman that Sigma takes weeks to get your lens returned and that there have been some compatiability issues with Canon/Sigma.

I've never bought anything from Sigma, but in the interest of objectivity, Canon and Nikon can both take weeks to turn around gear. I wouldn't go just off of what camera salesmen say.

I always check fredmiranda.com and the-digital-picture.com for lens reviews.

I had a Tokina 12-24 and loved it. The only downside was bad CA's, but Adobe Camera Raw looked after that for me ;-) Better build than the Canon 10-22 (I've owned both), equal or better sharpness than the Canon, and constant aperture to boot. I only sold it to pick up a 17-40 on the way towards full-frame ...

I read many of the reviews and almost all of them have issues with dust. I have cheap(er) lenses and I've never had dust in the lens - just on my sensor. Is this a major issue with these lenses or is it so minute that I haven't noticed it happening to mine too? Is there a way to prevent/repair the problem?
-Eddie

I'm not sure--I just recently got the lens myself. I still think the lens is worth it just b/c it has a great range, has IS and is a decent weight! I would think if any dust gets in, clean it out by a professional. I actually do need info. on where I can get my camera professionally cleaned...

I have the Tamron 11-18 and really like it. It's also pretty affordable compared to some of the others listed.

Click to view attachment

I wouldn't worry about dust in the lens. There would have to be a LOT caked up inside for it to have any effect on the image.

+1
No complaints for me either.
Great in low light.