Canon 10 -18mm or 17-55 IS 2.8

Discussion in 'Beginner Questions' started by Sandralynn, Sep 7, 2020.

  1. Sandralynn

    Sandralynn New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2020
    Messages:
    1
    Equipment:
    Canon Digital XT
    I want to try to take some of those dreamy seascape pictures where the water looks like cotton candy during a sunset. My question is can I get the same effect with my 17-55 or should I buy a 10-18mm.
     

  2. johnsey

    johnsey Site Moderator Staff Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2017
    Messages:
    2,120
    Location:
    Fargo, ND
    Equipment:
    5dMk4, 5dsR, 5dMk2, 20D, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100mm 2.8 Macro USM, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 17-40mm 4.0L, TS-E 24mm 3.5L II, Rokinon 14mm 2.8; Pixma Pro-100
    Either lens, creamy water will come from a 1/2 shutter speed or longer depending on the lighting and water movement. Essentially you are capturing the movement of the water. What you need is a strong neutral density filter which will bring down the shutter speed to work better with the aperture you want to use.

    The 10-18 performs quite well for the money actually and is clearly wider which is a plus if you like wide landscapes. I normally suggest the fixed aperture lens over a variable one, but not sure if the value is there in this comparison.
    The 17-55 you are paying for the 2.8 aperture which you likely will not use on those landscapes as you probably want plenty of depth of field. Its a good lens and better for other uses, but I do not know how it would fit with other lenses you may own.
    The IS is great to have if your shooting around 1/30 of a second, but long exposures on at tripod it needs to be turned off so not a help for those landscapes you are talking about.
    Also at the 500/600 price point you can start looking at full frame lenses which may be worth your investment long term if you upgrade the body down the line.. the 17-40 and 16-35 L lenses are great, built much better, and a better investment long term. Some food for thought at least.
     
  3. GDN

    GDN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2018
    Messages:
    2,166
    Location:
    South Island, NZ
    Equipment:
    A little Canon stuff

    I think that you should try your 17-55. But what you need is a ND filter and a tripod. Spend your money there for now. If you buy a new lens, you still need a ND filter and a tripod to get a slow enough shutter speed.

    Gary
     
  4. johnsey

    johnsey Site Moderator Staff Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2017
    Messages:
    2,120
    Location:
    Fargo, ND
    Equipment:
    5dMk4, 5dsR, 5dMk2, 20D, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100mm 2.8 Macro USM, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 17-40mm 4.0L, TS-E 24mm 3.5L II, Rokinon 14mm 2.8; Pixma Pro-100
    My bad there, I missed the part where the 17-55 was already owned. Oops
     

Share This Page