# Wide angle lens



## Chisox2335 (Apr 25, 2014)

I am getting a 5d3 and currently have a 70d. I own an EF 24-70 f4 and an efs 15-85. 

Looking to do a little astro photography in Africa and I like landscape photography. Should I get the rokinon 14mm f2.8 for about $300 or look for a ef17-40 f4 for about $650 used. 

Let me know what you guys think!
Thanks!


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 25, 2014)

The Rokinon is much better of the two for astro, but the 17-40 is more versatile for most other things. Can you afford both? 14mm is much wider than 17mm, so each has their uses, but given your preference for landscape over astro, I'd suggest the 17-40 if you could only get one.


----------



## abcde12345 (Apr 25, 2014)

A good in between would be getting the Tokina 16-28mm, which is sharper than Canon's own lens. It's not as sharp as Rokinon since it's a prime lens, but you get a zoom and motor.


----------



## Chisox2335 (Apr 25, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> The Rokinon is much better of the two for astro, but the 17-40 is more versatile for most other things. Can you afford both? 14mm is much wider than 17mm, so each has their uses, but given your preference for landscape over astro, I'd suggest the 17-40 if you could only get one.



Given how much I've already spent this year Id prefer to only buy one.


----------



## Chisox2335 (Apr 25, 2014)

Chisox2335 said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > The Rokinon is much better of the two for astro, but the 17-40 is more versatile for most other things. Can you afford both? 14mm is much wider than 17mm, so each has their uses, but given your preference for landscape over astro, I'd suggest the 17-40 if you could only get one.
> ...



I will have to look into the tokina. Thanks for the recommendation.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Apr 25, 2014)

Chisox2335 said:


> Given how much I've already spent this year Id prefer to only buy one.



Budgeting is very important. Generally, I calculate what I can reasonably afford for camera stuff and then double it. ;D

My wife has an opposing opinion though.


----------



## mrzero (Apr 25, 2014)

I'd get the 14mm Rokinon. The 17-40 would have too much overlap with your 24-70.


----------



## Chisox2335 (Apr 25, 2014)

mrzero said:


> I'd get the 14mm Rokinon. The 17-40 would have too much overlap with your 24-70.


I was thinking the same thing. I'd probably infrequently use 24-70 if I got the 17-40.


----------



## bholliman (Apr 26, 2014)

Rokinon/Samyang 14mm 2.8 UMC. Excellent lens, very sharp with minimal coma. Great value.


----------



## JLRoyal42 (Apr 26, 2014)

I actually have my 17-40mm L for sale if your interested. I am interested in going lower than $650 as well. Let me know.


----------



## Chisox2335 (Apr 26, 2014)

JLRoyal42 said:


> I actually have my 17-40mm L for sale if your interested. I am interested in going lower than $650 as well. Let me know.



Canon has refurbs for $571 in stock right now. I'm going to stick with the rokinon. Thanks though


----------



## dlleno (May 13, 2014)

is this the Rokinon y'all are raving about:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/769532-REG/Rokinon_FE14M_C_14mm_Ultra_Wide_Angle_f_2_8.html

and its the same as Samyang?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/859167-REG/Samyang_SY14M_C_14mm_f_2_8_Super_Wide.html


----------



## Chisox2335 (Jun 16, 2014)

dlleno said:


> is this the Rokinon y'all are raving about:
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/769532-REG/Rokinon_FE14M_C_14mm_Ultra_Wide_Angle_f_2_8.html
> 
> ...



Yes. Rokinon samyang bower all the same


----------



## scottkinfw (Jun 16, 2014)

That is the one. I have the Samyang version and love it. I don't use it often but when I do, it produces great pics with a unique perspective. If you are used to shooting manual, no problem. The manual focusing takes a bit of practice. For a tip, do that in live view and magnify to 10X. F8 is about the sweet spot. The distance marks on the focusing ring tend not to be that accurate so experiment with it before you go after the money shots.

sek


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jun 16, 2014)

I have the Rokinon 14 mm 2.8 and it's a stunning lens. It's the "go to lens" for night skies. For daytime use, live view is good to nail the manual focus. Really good sharp images wide open & even better at around 5.6 - 8.0. Chromatic aberration is almost non-existent and really nice results when shooting star fields or vintage cars with lots of chrome.



CAMELOPARDALID meteorite 2011a 23-24 May 2014 Bear River Dam © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr



Motherlode Cruise 2013 img2074 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr



Rokinon 14mm f2.8 &amp; Canon 5D Mark III © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr

I also have the Tokina 16-28 f2.8. This is a really good value for the price. I think is really gives Canon lenses a run for the money. The distortion isn't bad at 16 mm and might be a good choice for landscapes. The AF seems to be right on a pretty quick. It's well built and weighs an even 2 pounds!



NASA glider sunset Edwards AFB V3 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr



B-29 FiFi Cockpit © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr



Canon 5D Mark III &amp; Tokina 16-28 f2.8 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal Photography, on Flickr


----------



## Chisox2335 (Jun 22, 2014)

I was looking at the tokina obviously produces beautiful shots in the right hands.


----------

