Looking for a recommendation for a ultra-wide angle lens

[ChrisPBacon]

I’m looking for and would sincerely appreciate your recommendations for the best prime EF-mount ultra wide-angle lens for use on Canon EOS crop-sensor (7D) and full-frame cameras (specifically 6D, and 6D Mk. II) for astrophotography.

(While there are excellent zoom lenses available, the possible risk of chromatic aberration makes them impractical.  That said, I’m a relative novice to astrophotography and still have a great deal to learn — so if you use a zoom lense for astrophotography, please let me know of your experience.)

I’m imaging asterisms and the Milky Way which require relatively longer exposures but I wish to avoid having stars appear oblong in shape from too-long an exposure; to that end, I need the fastest glass possible to obtain as much detail a lens is capable of capturing — as well as the quality of the detail that is captured. Canon’s 14mm f/2.8L is a good lens, but is it the best quality glass (assuming that cost is not a factor) on the market?  It must be heresy to ask if other manufacturers produce a better lens, but I’m willing to consider all contenders as long as the lens is compatible with my Canon cameras: price is not a consideration.

As I disable autofocus and image stabilization in taking these types of photos, a manual focus (only) lens such as those made by Zeiss is perfectly acceptable.

I’m well aware that below f/2.8, price increases dramatically: while having an equatorial mount would allow for longer exposure times without star distortion, it would create problems for foreground terrain blurring and additional post-production labor, which I’d like to avoid if possible. My 6D is heavily modified for heat reduction and has had its IR filter removed so that light in wavelengths of 656.28 nm appear in photos, but the scale of these structures make use of a telescope impractical.  Light pollution poses another difficulty with increased exposure times, so high-quality fast glass is a better option for my purposes.

Any lens f/2.0 or below, in the range of 8-18mm, might be ideal.  I would appreciate anyone with experience with this lens type sharing their recommendation.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I use the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, and love it"

I don't, as a matter of fact I stopped using mine for anything. It certainly is not anywhere close to being capable of astrophotography.

---

I have not used it for astrophotography.  I have found the manual focusing Rokinon 14mm T3.1 to be more useful for shots of the night sky because of its' focus scale and manual aperture ring.  It is impossible to adjust aperture when an electronic aperture lens is set to MF, and I do not want to switch it to AF.

The only drawback with the Rokinon is that it may be too wide, and creates barrel distortion on the edges.  This is not much of a problem with a single long exposure.  It becomes an issue when you start tacking photos, and auto aligning them.

[ebiggs1]

"... the Rokinon is that it may be too wide, and creates barrel distortion on the edges."

I would like to see a sample photo.  I no longer do sky photography. I only hear the results from my friends that do. I was into it heavily for a few years. I was a charter member of the Powel Observatory. When it moved to Missouri I pretty much quit.

Several of the Rokinon lenses are favorites.  Sometimes you have to get several to many before you get a good one. However when you get a good one it is good.

"...it may be too wide..."

When it comes to capturing the night sky, a camera lens that is fast and wide like the 14mm Rock works well.. You can capture much more sky and that is the purpose of such a lens. Now if you don't want a wide angel sky it may be too wide.  Usually not the case.

"...creates barrel distortion on the edges."

If all you do is shoot landscapes it doesn't matter.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... the Rokinon is that it may be too wide, and creates barrel distortion on the edges."

I would like to see a sample photo.  I no longer do sky photography. I only hear the results from my friends that do. I was into it heavily for a few years. I was a charter member of the Powel Observatory. When it moved to Missouri I pretty much quit.

Several of the Rokinon lenses are favorites.  Sometimes you have to get several to many before you get a good one. However when you get a good one it is good.

"...it may be too wide..."

When it comes to capturing the night sky, a camera lens that is fast and wide like the 14mm Rock works well.. You can capture much more sky and that is the purpose of such a lens. Now if you don't want a wide angel sky it may be too wide.  Usually not the case.

"...creates barrel distortion on the edges."

If all you do is shoot landscapes it doesn't matter.

---

"The only drawback with the Rokinon is that it may be too wide, and creates barrel distortion on the edges.  This is not much of a problem with a single long exposure.  It becomes an issue when you start [stacking] photos, and auto aligning them."

You just love to take a few words out of context and apply your own meaning to them.  Have you ever tried to auto align and stack photos.before?  It sounds like you may have forgotten what is involved.

[ebiggs1]

Actually, my thoughts was, I truly doubt you have done any astrophotography. And, no, the Moon doesn't count.

"I would like to see a sample photo."

I'll wait !  

[Waddizzle]

[Waddizzle]

Nah!  Someone has to be the adult in the room.

[goalerjones]

[goalerjones]

The above image is from the Tamron 15-30 f2.8 G1 verson of the lens on a canon 5DM4, 30 second exposure, 2k ISO, manual focus, remote shutter release. Yes, there is fringe distortion which can only be corrected to a point. However, when not using recognizeable elements at the edges I find the lens more than capable.

[ebiggs1]

Thanx for the example.  You have the G2 version to be clear?  I had the SP, I know of no G1 but I may have missed it.

It is a gorgeous shot, you can be proud of.

[ChrisPBacon]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

I know... had the same response a few times.