I'm going on a one week vacation pretty soon to Southern Italy to just relax and forget pretty much that there is an outside world bigger than that of the small village I plan on visiting. However I would like to take as many pictures as possible while I am there. So what lenses would you guys recommend for open vistas as well as smaller shots with a fixed image.


Edit:

The Camera is a Canon 40D.

Budget?

An ultra-wide angle is often recommended for vacations and traveling. Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24.

I wrote out something very complex and very detailed explanation of my budget but it seemed like too much so I will say this, it is 2500 USD.

Lots of room to work with then. What current lens do you have now?

Canon 10-22
Canon 17-55 IS
Canon 70-200 f/4L IS

The best of the best in their category which covers 10-200mm. (16-320mm)

(though you could get a 70-200 2.8 IS, skip it for the sake of budget)

EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens (Came with Camera)
Sigma 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DC
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM

Those are the lenses I currently own.

That should work well then--sell off the first two and keep the 30 1.4.

Reading reviews a lot of people like the Sigma 10-20 over the Canon 10-22, have you used both and which do you prefer?

I've tried out the Sigma 10-20 and it was fantastic. It's built better than the Canon for sure because its from their EX line, but I recommended the Canon because its faster.

Image quality of both would be indistinguishable--you couldn't go wrong with either.

I decided on the Canon 10-22 and Canon 17-55 IS lenses, and decided against the Canon 70-200 for now as it is a Telephoto lens and I have personal experience with those, and I remember how impossible it was to take a well balanced shot without a tripod, and setting a tripod up with Mediterranean winds blowing isn't my idea of a good time.

Looks like you've got a good kit there. Do you really need/want to go below 17mm? Your starting to get into fisheye lens territory there and I always think you're better off with a prime fisheye. I'm afraid I don't know too much about Canon lenses.

Giga can you offer an opinion of the Sigma 10mm f/2.8 EX ?

If you can live without the 10-17mm options it looks like a good lens.

I haven't messed with fisheyes as i'm not into the look myself really, but the Canon 10-22 and Sigma 10-20 are rectilinear lens.

I still urge an UWA for travel/landscapes. Make a world of difference in the field of view you get: http://flickr.com/search/?q=10-22mm&ss...;ct=3&s=int

Well I did say I didn't know about Canon lenses.

Also I keep forgetting that 10mm digital = 16mm 35mm format. So I was thinking the 10-22 was a fisheye.

At 10mm you must get some barrelling though?

Plastic Fantastic!!!!

50 f/1.8

Yep, distortion is unavoidable with such wide angles but the 10-22 handles it remarkably well considering its an UWA.

Wow that's damn good.

Unless it something to do with how I'm seeing that picture (bit drunk but it's not spinning so I'll assume I'm seeing it correctly).

If it's that small in a grid, with an actual picture, it's going to be almost un-noticable.

I have the Canon 10-22mm. Love that lens. Such a light weight lens and produces fantastic images. I'm taking it on a hiking trip in Huangshan, China. It'll probably be fixed to my camera for most of the 3 day hike. With views like this:






It's a must!

remember to get up for sunrise on the mountain. becareful climbing. the traveling saying in china applies here also , if u look at the view, don't keep moving. move only when u don't place ur eyes on the view else u'll trip and fall.

Mikey! Nice shots man. hope your having a good time.


In terms of the topic i would go for the d300 - the d200 is an awesome camera. not only is it somthing nice to look at but its nowhere near as big as the 40D and the lens for everyday use HAS to be the 18-200mm VR Nikon lens.

He already has a 40D.

Ha those aren't my photos Tom