I recently borrowed a 17-40 lens from a wedding photographer friend for an event that I was shooting for. My initial thought was that I may want to have the lens available in case I want to shoot images that may give a scale of the number of attendees at this event; Barely used the lens.
In my normal day to day shooting, my normal telephoto lens at 24mm does the trick 99% of the time. I even have a 10-22 for my crop body lens which rarely comes out of my bag. I just don't normally shoot at that wide of a focal length. Even my wedding photographer friend rarely uses her 17-40 and she was even willing to even sell it to me.
I have friends that take pictures at social dance (I swing dance) that seem to use wide angle lens often but I generally dislike the images they produced, especially when it is used as a portrait lens. The perspective distortion really bothers me.
I know that wide angle lens are popular among landscape photographers (which I don't do a lot of myself). I like to hear from other photographers how they use their wide angle lens and I would love to see images of its use. Maybe it will inspire me to use my 10-22mm lens more often or even consider picking up the 17-40 for my full-frame camera body.
Looking forward to the responses! I just bought a 14mm from Amazon yesterday and I can't wait to try it out. I bought it specifically to try out night sky photography, but there have also been certain landscape shots where I felt like my 24mm just didn't capture enough, and also I was recently playing around with some indoor shots that could have used a wider angle. The distortion doesn't bother me on shots like that, but I don't think I would use it for portraits or horses... but then again, the distortion might add an interesting element if used cleverly. So, yeah, can't wait to play around with it!
I love my 10-22 mm canon on my 7D. I use it extensively while travelling and on holiday as it can capture such a lot of what I can see.
The only time I have used it for photos of people or animals would be if I intentionally wanted a distorted look!
I bought a Sigma 10-20mm Wide Angle a couple months ago, hoping to become better at landscape photography. Unfortunately, I haven't had a lot of time to use it. But so far its been great. Though I do think the limitations of the crop sensor take away from the full potential of the lens.
Used the wide angle in the old Paramount Theatre in Asbury Park, NJ. Really helped bring out the architecture of the fading structure that a stock lens wouldn't have been able to provide.
I bought a wide angle lens (10-24) and used it for a little while for landscapes but it is just to specialized. I sold it and got a 16-85 instead. It is a decent compromise for a wide end and works as an excellent walk around lens but I really only use three lenses: 24-70 2.8, 105 2.8 (macro) and 50 1.4. If I don't find a need for the wide end of the 16-85 soon, I may just sell it.
I have a Tokina 11-16mm bought primarily for night sky shots, but I have not used it much for that as the sky never seems to be clear when I can get out there ... but I have used it in other ways:
I had my 14-24 Nikon wide angle for over a year before figuring out (and having some guidance) in how to use it. It's quite a wonderful lens for architecture and landscape, as well as the night sky. At 14, distortion is a given but you can adjust using PT-Lens or LR Lens Correction. At 24, it's quite handy even as a walk-about. I do not like what it does when living things are in the image, generally. It is specialized in a sense, but it can be used widely once you start exploring the possibilities. It's become one of my favorite lenses.
Like some of the postings - when you want huge ample foregrounds for landscape or architecture shots, when you want the exaggerated distorted face perspective (the dog). And for wide architecture shots upwards, sometimes straightened, sometimes not.
Here's one at 20mm
Here's a 10.5 (fisheye) curve-distortion corrected (depth stretching retained, purposely though) and straightened. There was ample room in the frame to do both.
Here's a straight 10mm that's pretty typical for me, structures (here a simple power pole) shot from immediately below, straight into the air. No perspective adjustment of course.
All on APS-C bodies.
And here's a classic landscape at 24mm on a full frame body. Not so typical for me, not having shot much full frame, but doing more so recently with the Nikon D750 and the F80 film 35mm SLR, the latter a huge $24 on eBay..
This was taken with my Canon 17-40MM lens on a boat trip to Bass Rock to see gannets. I was very close to these birds and was blown away by the photos I took that day using this lens.
@davidtom hi, as others told here before. A wide angle lens is good for landscape, night photography or architecture. Also is good for indoor shots. If you want to use your 17-40 for portraits you must try with its focal at 40mm. This will give you a perspective very similar to these that you can find on a 50mm lens for portrait on an 35mm camera. If you are using and APS-C camera you should remind to multiply your focal by 1.5 or 1.6 to get the 35mm film lens equivalent. I hope this will help you :)
For the ntmc challenge I've used my wide-ish angle lens, 34mm equivalent (17mm micro 4/3) this month and it's been a great learning experience and fun.
I absolutely love them. I haven't purposely bought a lens wider than 28mm in I don't know how long. I shoot on both crop and full-frame sensors. I shoot mainly cars and landscape. A 24mm on a crop sensor is a wonderful walk-around and candid focal length, especially if you're using the Canon 24mm pancake.
I currently own the Tokina 11-16 and 24mm pancake for my canon DSLR, and a 17mm and 24mm for my Canon film and crop sensor mirrorless, and a 28mm on my Nikon film body.
My widest is a 24-70 (full frame). It's my walk around lens even though it is big and heavy. I agree with the others - I wouldn't have considered a 17-40mm to be a portrait lens and while not a wedding photographer, I can't really imagine using a wide angle for any other shots than the big group shot or maybe the interior of a church. If you have another lens that well covers the 40mm end of things I'm not surprised you barely used this one.
I quite enjoy a little landscape here and there as a hobby and haven't really felt a need yet for anything wider than 24mm. If landscape is not something you are particularly interested in I probably wouldn't consider an ultra-wide angle lens.
Thanks for everyone's input and for those that shared their wonderful landscape, night sky, urban, wildlife and architecture photos. There seems to be a few of us that don't often shoot ultra wide. However, I've pulled out my 10-22mm lens, blown off the dust and I'm going to go see what images I can take around the city during lunch.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
The only time I have used it for photos of people or animals would be if I intentionally wanted a distorted look!
Used the wide angle in the old Paramount Theatre in Asbury Park, NJ. Really helped bring out the architecture of the fading structure that a stock lens wouldn't have been able to provide.
Urban architecture example:
Landscape example:
Night Sky example:
Here's one at 20mm
Here's a 10.5 (fisheye) curve-distortion corrected (depth stretching retained, purposely though) and straightened. There was ample room in the frame to do both.
Here's a straight 10mm that's pretty typical for me, structures (here a simple power pole) shot from immediately below, straight into the air. No perspective adjustment of course.
All on APS-C bodies.
And here's a classic landscape at 24mm on a full frame body. Not so typical for me, not having shot much full frame, but doing more so recently with the Nikon D750 and the F80 film 35mm SLR, the latter a huge $24 on eBay..
Or an entire room from inside:
I currently own the Tokina 11-16 and 24mm pancake for my canon DSLR, and a 17mm and 24mm for my Canon film and crop sensor mirrorless, and a 28mm on my Nikon film body.
I quite enjoy a little landscape here and there as a hobby and haven't really felt a need yet for anything wider than 24mm. If landscape is not something you are particularly interested in I probably wouldn't consider an ultra-wide angle lens.
Thanks for everyone's input and for those that shared their wonderful landscape, night sky, urban, wildlife and architecture photos. There seems to be a few of us that don't often shoot ultra wide. However, I've pulled out my 10-22mm lens, blown off the dust and I'm going to go see what images I can take around the city during lunch.
But every so often I do it for environmental portraits.
Sometimes it works
And sometimes it doesn't