gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I have the Sigma 10-20 for my crop frame D7200. Used it exclusively in our tour of the Utah parks. Very happy with the results.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...trying to decide if anything wider than 24mm is useful..." Steve depends on the genre... and your client base... Ultrawide lenses are a very unique optic which affords one the ability to create enigmatic and astonishing narratives... far more than an ultra telephoto lens.... Albeit Ultrawide can be (and often are) the most challenging optics to master.

They bring to the table an impact the likes of such only Salvador Dali and Maurits Cornelis Escher have mastered to perfection. But wait, if you are shooting events or architectural they are an oft deployed tool of choice for the masters of those genres.

Many folks try Ultrawides, shake their heads and walk away saying they are way too weird to be of merit for commercial work... Not true... Fashion Editorials in particular often gravitate to Ultrawide imagery. Most notable VOGUE etc.

So funny how those responding here are only championing a specific bit of Ultrawide Kit they own... Come on folks... Please show us how you have actually used them...

And Thank You! Paul... You're the Lone Ranger here
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-690844-1.html

Please follow Paul's lead here and show how you have actually deploy the Ultrawide end of photographic optics... And can you please do so without being an "Influencer" for a brand and/or particular bit of kit? There are enough "Influencers" on IG...

Thanks...
Hope this helps Steve...
All the best on your epic photographic journey...
.

16mm field of view (f2.8)

(Download)

16mm field of view (f5.6)

(Download)

16mm field of view (f2.8)

(Download)

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

My 10-18 gets a lot of use on my T8i, YMMV, Bob.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I agree that anything wider than 24mm is of very limited/specialized value - especially in today's digital world where sweep/stitched panos are easily done. If I did go wider than 24mm, I would be tending to use a prime lens rather than a zoom for the IQ.
Back in the film era, I used and lusted after wide angles for commercial, event and landscape work and even considered 28mm my "normal" lens. Used properly, they can add a unique artistic interpretation of the subject.

Really GOOD optically wide angle lenses are very hard to make and are very expensive when they are !
.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

I have the Canon 11-24mm. I found it to be a great distortion fee lens. Don't use it often but it;s all you can ask for.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I find that my Canon 17-40L is quite useful, not only for interior/architectural shots, but outdoors as well. And since Thomas asked…

jeweler53

I bought a 16mm Zenit on a whim. I like it so much that I added a CPU chip. I use it way more often than I expected to.

yorkiebyte Loc: Scottsdale, AZ/Bandon by the Sea, OR

(Download)

StanMac Loc: Tennessee

There will always be a need for an ultra wide lens if you have one in your kit. If you don’t have one in your kit, you will always wish you had one when need one.

Stan

photoman43

I do find that my Nikon 20mm prime lens gets more use than I had anticipated. if you like landscapes with large sky area I often use the 20mm over the 24-70mm zoom. If you are doing indoor or architectural photos, you may need the wider view to allow for image area that gets "eliminated" when you process for distortions and vertical corrections. And if you do star trails than a wide lens is often needed.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

Depending on the camera sensor, FF or crop, the 24 may be all you need. I think back to film days and very few people I knew had lenses shorter that 28mm. Professionals maybe but in my circle of photographers the shorter lenses created distortion that few wanted. I have kit lenses that are 18-55mm which is equivalent in field of view of a 27 to 82.5mm on my Pentax crop sensors.

Your personal needs may differ from mine, but really only you can fully determine your lens requirements.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

Thank you so much for the epic image TriX!
Loving the vanishing point perspective latent within...
Fabulous color harmonies...

The wide horizontal orientation yields an enchanting "Cinematic" effect!

Cheers!

radiomantom Loc: Plymouth Indiana

I am shooting with two Sony DSLR's. I have a Tamron 17-55 f 2.8 on one of them and a Tamron 55-300 on the other. 90% of my shooting is with the 17-55.

Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara

Like most questions asked here the answer is it depends on what you are shooting. Like CHG_Canon the 16-40 is my go to lens for wide angle landscapes. Ken Rockwell considered it to be the best wide angle Canon EF mount lens and I agree. When I shot cropped images my EF-S 10-16 was great. When I shoot astro I use a Rokinon 2.8 14mm manual lens. But as said before for landscapes you could use your nifty 50 and shoot a pano and there are pros that swear by this method. A 3 or maybe even a 2 panel pano would be as wide or wider than even my 14mm.

On the other hand, I’d never shot a portrait with a wide-angle. In my opinion, the work you’d have to do in post isn’t worth it. If a 35 wasn’t wide enough and I couldnt move back I guess I might go to a 24 in a pinch.

So what do you shoot and how often? Do you shoot crop or FF? Is it worth it to buy what could be a very expensive lens and use it once a year? If not, rent it. Canon just came out with an RF 16mm 2.8. It is a pancake lens. I could put it on my RP body and have a setup slightly bigger than a point and shoot. And I can rent it for $16 for 7 days. Or I can buy the new RF 2.8 super zoom L USM IS 15-35 for $3K. I’m not a pro so ….

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Thank you for the kind words Thomas.