# New lens upgrade



## slyzxx (Jul 20, 2012)

Hey, what`s up. I have a canon t2i, with a .50mm and kit lens 18-55mm. If you were me and wanted to upgrade to a new lens around $500 and shoot mostly landscape what would you get. 
I was opting for the 11-16mm tokina f1.8 but its 600 bucks so i`m not sure what else to get.


----------



## TCampbell (Jul 20, 2012)

Although wider angle lenses are usually preferred for landscapes, it doesn't necessarily need to be a "fast" lens.  Fast lenses are great when you're taking hand-held shots in poor lighting and thus need to maintain a faster shutter speed.  But when the camera isn't moving AND the subject isn't moving, you can keep the shutter open as long as necessary to get the shot.  

Get a quality tripod (something solid that won't transfer vibrations to the camera in a stiff breeze and if you have to go hiking out to get the best vantage points you'll want a LIGHT quality tripod.  Carbon fiber is light.  But it's also more flexible than aluminum tubing.  To compensate the tripod usually needs larger carbon fiber tubing (which is still really light).  But a "quality" carbon fiber tripod is usually a bit on the spend side.

You're going for a very broad depth of field... so those really low f-stops aren't you're friend when you want a wide depth of field.  The middle apertures are usually the sharpest -- but only offer average depth of field.  You get maximum depth of field at the highest possible f-stops.  Unfortunately you ALSO hit diffraction limits at max f-stops (only noticeable if you're going to display or print the image in a large size.)  That means f/8 or f/11 will probably yield better results than f/16 or f/22 if you plan to produce large prints.  If you're producing smaller images then f/16 or 22 will offer even more depth of field.


----------



## slyzxx (Jul 21, 2012)

I should make clear as well, that i wish to be able to take photo`s of stars at night as well, hence the low fstop.  I have a manfrotto tripod so i`m not worried about stabilization.


----------



## jaomul (Jul 21, 2012)

Sigma 10-20 f3.5 or Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 get good reviews. Chances are you wont find a stabilized lens in these focal lengths


----------



## TheKenTurner (Jul 21, 2012)

For <$500, your two options are the Sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6 EX, and the Tamron 10-24 3.5-4.5. The Sigma will probably be better quality, but the Tamron will let in a little more light. I would go with the Sigma because when taking night shots of stars, you need sharpness. But also, 10-20mm is probably too wide.


----------



## clo_iam (Jul 22, 2012)

You should also look up the Sigma 8-16mm 4.5-5.6 it's a couple hundred over your budget but it's the widest lens you'll find on the market and will be good for the t2i crop sensor. Shoot with a tripod also. No need for f1.8


----------



## morganza (Jul 22, 2012)

TheKenTurner said:


> For <$500, your two options are the Sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6 EX, and the Tamron 10-24 3.5-4.5. The Sigma will probably be better quality, but the Tamron will let in a little more light. I would go with the Sigma because when taking night shots of stars, you need sharpness. But also, 10-20mm is probably too wide.




Would choose the Sigma one for myself.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 22, 2012)

The Tokina is f/2.8, not f/1.8.


----------



## sovietdoc (Jul 22, 2012)

If I were you , I'd go with Sigma 10-20 for landscapes.


----------



## slyzxx (Jul 22, 2012)

well the sigma looks awesome, and really good reviews but at f/4-5.6 i`m not sure catching star trails would be easy.


----------



## slyzxx (Jul 22, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> The Tokina is f/2.8, not f/1.8.


 My bad


----------



## daarksun (Jul 23, 2012)

stick with the tokina at 2.8. More all around use for what you were talking about.


----------

