Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 24-08-2011, 08:46 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Help with widefield astro/landscapes lens (ultrawide 10-22mm)

Hi guys

Since I'm not going to be able to afford to get a 5D Mk II in the near future, I think I'll get the 10-22mm lens instead.

The Canon one is around $800-$900 new (will probably buy 2nd hand), and is f/3.5-f/4.5

There's also a Sigma one (10-20mm) that's a little cheaper.

Ideally I want it as fast as possible for timelapses. At the moment I have to do 15-30 second exposures. The 5D Mk II guys can do 8s.


So, some opinions please.

1. Are there any other lenses in that range that I should be considering? (will go on a Canon 40D). Price < $1000.

2. Which, out of the Canon or Sigma, would be better? I had a Sigma 17-70 and it was great.

3. Can anyone share any astro landscapes (widefield sky, landscape + sky) taken with these wide lenses.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24-08-2011, 09:33 AM
StephenM's Avatar
StephenM (Stephen)
Registered User

StephenM is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,399
Hi Mike,

Have you considered the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8? It's one that I'd like to get one day. I've seen some nice astro widefields with this lens on on POTN.

Cheers,
Stephen
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24-08-2011, 09:51 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Sounds pretty good, at around $900 it's within budget and f/2.8 is faster than the Canon/Sigma.

Do you have some links to some?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24-08-2011, 10:07 AM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
Mike,

Consider that Phil is shooting at f/1.4 for his 8 second exposures at ISO-3200.

I'm not sure you'd want to push the 40D to ISO-3200 without some kind of noise reduction. Even at ISO-3200, I don't think the 40D files are going to be as clean.

Also, consider, that at f/2.8, you are still two stops slower than f/1.4, so, you're still going to likely be shooting 30 second exposures, unless you're under some really dark skies.

Just a hunch, but, still worth a shot, because once you've reduced the RAWs down to video resolution, you may still be able to produce decent timelapses. I guess the other thing to remember is that you can always push the RAWs a stop in brightness in DPP. Might still be worth it.

H
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24-08-2011, 01:55 PM
RB's Avatar
RB (Andrew)
Moderator

RB is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 21,991
Mike I've got the 10-22mm and love it, it's a very nice lens and will work a treat on your 40D.
To get better performance you'll need to go up in price for a faster lens.

The Sigma is also an excellent lens and you won't be disappointed with it either.

For an APC sensor these two lenses are great at that price.

A little more and the Tonika f/2.8 is a good alternative, although QC is variable I've heard on this brand.

I bought the Tonika fisheye a few years back but swapped it for the Canon fisheye instead because I wasn't happy with the QC.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24-08-2011, 02:32 PM
mithrandir's Avatar
mithrandir (Andrew)
Registered User

mithrandir is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glenhaven
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman View Post
Sounds pretty good, at around $900 it's within budget and f/2.8 is faster than the Canon/Sigma.

Do you have some links to some?
My only complaint with my Tokina 11-16 is it is too wide angle to shoot stars at home. I either get trees or the house in frame, illuminated by those blasted yellow street lights.

I'll find some shots from up at Willow Tree when I get home.

The distortion is minimal for a lens of this focal length, and makes it popular for shooting interiors.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 24-08-2011, 03:10 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane View Post
Mike,

Consider that Phil is shooting at f/1.4 for his 8 second exposures at ISO-3200.

I'm not sure you'd want to push the 40D to ISO-3200 without some kind of noise reduction. Even at ISO-3200, I don't think the 40D files are going to be as clean.

Also, consider, that at f/2.8, you are still two stops slower than f/1.4, so, you're still going to likely be shooting 30 second exposures, unless you're under some really dark skies.

Just a hunch, but, still worth a shot, because once you've reduced the RAWs down to video resolution, you may still be able to produce decent timelapses. I guess the other thing to remember is that you can always push the RAWs a stop in brightness in DPP. Might still be worth it.

H
All perfectly valid points.

I've done timelapses before with my 40D and Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 so if I have to do 25-30s I know I can, and yes, I usually increase the brightness in post-prod.

I tried ISO3200 once and it was way too noisy on the 40D.

I just want something with a wider field of view.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 24-08-2011, 03:11 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by RB View Post
Mike I've got the 10-22mm and love it, it's a very nice lens and will work a treat on your 40D.
To get better performance you'll need to go up in price for a faster lens.

The Sigma is also an excellent lens and you won't be disappointed with it either.

For an APC sensor these two lenses are great at that price.

A little more and the Tonika f/2.8 is a good alternative, although QC is variable I've heard on this brand.

I bought the Tonika fisheye a few years back but swapped it for the Canon fisheye instead because I wasn't happy with the QC.
hmm, thanks for sharing your experiences.

I know many people are happy with the Canon 10-22. I just thought f/3.5 is getting a bit slow.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 24-08-2011, 03:12 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by mithrandir View Post
My only complaint with my Tokina 11-16 is it is too wide angle to shoot stars at home. I either get trees or the house in frame, illuminated by those blasted yellow street lights.

I'll find some shots from up at Willow Tree when I get home.

The distortion is minimal for a lens of this focal length, and makes it popular for shooting interiors.
Yeh it's not something i'd likely use at home - more for when I'm on site with the intention of getting lots of foreground and lots of sky.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 24-08-2011, 09:15 PM
trek1701's Avatar
trek1701 (Mark)
Registered User

trek1701 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 199
A true wide angle rectilinear lens

http://www.completedigitalphotography.com/?p=327

Cheers Mark
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 24-08-2011, 09:26 PM
mithrandir's Avatar
mithrandir (Andrew)
Registered User

mithrandir is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glenhaven
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman View Post
Yeh it's not something i'd likely use at home - more for when I'm on site with the intention of getting lots of foreground and lots of sky.
An example taken up at Willow Tree, scaled to 25%, no other processing.
Exposure Time : 30
F Number : 2.8
Exposure Program : Manual
ISO : 400
Focal Length : 11.0 mm
Focal Length In 35mm Format : 16 mm
Scale Factor To 35 mm Equivalent: 1.5

Plate solve for it at astrometry.net quoted in part.

Your field is at (RA, Dec) = (226.945, -49.162) degrees
and spans 117.50 x 78.63 degrees .

Your field contains:

* The constellation Ara (Ara)
* The constellation Libra (Lib)
* The constellation Chamaeleon (Cha)
* Part of the constellation Carina (Car)
* The constellation Centaurus (Cen)
* The constellation Circinus (Cir)
* The constellation Crux (Cru)
* The constellation Norma (Nor)
* Part of the constellation Hydra (Hya)
* The constellation Lupus (Lup)
* The constellation Musca (Mus)
* Part of the constellation Octans (Oct)
* The constellation Apus (Aps)
* Part of the constellation Ophiuchus (Oph)
* Part of the constellation Pavo (Pav)
* The constellation Scorpius (Sco)
* The constellation Triangulum Australe (Tra)
* Part of the constellation Virgo (Vir)
* Part of the constellation Vela (Vel)
* NGC 3372 / eta Car nebula
* IC 4592
* The star α1Cen
* The star Agena / Hadar (βCen)
* The star Antares (αSco)
* The star Becrux / Mimosa (βCru)
* The star α1Cru
* The star α2Cen
* The star Miaplacidus (βCar)
* The star Gacrux (γCru)
* The star Shaula (λSco)
* The star α2Cru
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (DSC03328-50.JPG)
185.4 KB114 views
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 25-08-2011, 07:55 PM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
hey Mike

I have the Canon 10-22mm and recommend it but I don't actually use it myself all that much these days (all my 20D gear is loaned to a friend at the moment).

A couple of people on my workshops had the Tokina lens and it looks like an attractive f2.8 option for the APS-C cameras (under $700 as far as i can see).

For timelapse you can get away with much lower image quality than for a sharp widefield still image. In fact a bit of star bloating helps make the bright stars more visible as they can otherwise get lost. My 24mm f1.4 is pretty ugly in the corners wide open (it is f1.4!) but in the videos you don't really care.

Phil
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 25-08-2011, 08:48 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by philiphart View Post
hey Mike

I have the Canon 10-22mm and recommend it but I don't actually use it myself all that much these days (all my 20D gear is loaned to a friend at the moment).

A couple of people on my workshops had the Tokina lens and it looks like an attractive f2.8 option for the APS-C cameras (under $700 as far as i can see).

For timelapse you can get away with much lower image quality than for a sharp widefield still image. In fact a bit of star bloating helps make the bright stars more visible as they can otherwise get lost. My 24mm f1.4 is pretty ugly in the corners wide open (it is f1.4!) but in the videos you don't really care.

Phil
Thanks Phil - the Tokina is looking pretty attractive.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 25-08-2011, 08:48 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Feel like selling the 10-22?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 26-08-2011, 07:31 AM
philiphart's Avatar
philiphart (Phil Hart)
Registered User

philiphart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,060
I'll probably be passing on permanently the 20D soon to my friend, but not the 10-22mm
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 26-08-2011, 07:31 AM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by philiphart View Post
I'll probably be passing on permanently the 20D soon to my friend, but not the 10-22mm
So you'll be able to sell it to me then
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-02-2012, 12:42 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
I'm almost ready to get a 5D Mark II.

But I still need a wide angle lens to go on it. When I started this thread back in August, I wasn't going to get the 5DMarkII body yet, but now I definitely will (with the Kimberley trip coming up).

From looking at the Tokina 11-16, is it true that this WILL NOT go on the 5D Mark II body?

If that's the case, what are some other recommendations of an ultra-wide (not fisheye) that can go on a 5D Mark II (AND a 40D) body?

Ideally f/2.8 or faster, and around 10-20mm.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-02-2012, 12:59 PM
koputai's Avatar
koputai (Jason)
Registered User

koputai is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 1,633
10 - 20mm is awefully wide on a full frame camera Mike. Remember how wide the 10-22mm Canon is on the crop body, to get the same you only need a 16mm.

Canon has the 16 - 35mm f/2.8 zoom and the 17 - 40mm f/4 zoom. Out of those I'd go for the 17 - 40mm.

If you want W-I-D-E then there's the EF 14mm L, but it's very spendy.

Cheers,
Jason.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-02-2012, 01:02 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
It looks like there's two versions of the 11-16 Tokina?
This one appears to go on the 5D Mark II body?
http://www.amazon.com/Tokina-11-16mm.../dp/B0014Z3XMC

I thought it was an APS-C mount so only went on the older style bodies?

Jason,
I've used the 17-40mm and it's a great landscape lens, but at f/4.0 it's too slow for nightscapes.

You're right about 10-11mm being really wide on a FF body, but I can always zoom to 16mm of the 11-16
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-02-2012, 01:05 PM
iceman's Avatar
iceman (Mike)
Sir Post a Lot!

iceman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gosford, NSW, Australia
Posts: 36,709
The 16-35 looks great. But it's 3 times the price of the Tokina

http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/...mera-Lens.html
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 12:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement