September 1st, 2015
Dwayne ask the following question about wide-angle lenses:
I use a Nikon 7100 with a 12-24 mm lens. I only shoot horizontal for continuity. Small bathrooms are a problem. Would it be worth spending the money for a 10-20 mm lens even if it were say a Sigma. Does the 10-20 mm really make that much of a difference?
I agree about shooting small bathrooms horizontal so slide shows of the property don’t have a vertical format mixed in.
The effective wide end difference between a 12-24mm and a 10-20 mm is 19.2 mm vs 16 mm.
I did a quick handheld test in my small bathroom with my 5DMkII using a 16-35 mm lens. One shot at 16 mm and one shot at 19 mm. This bathroom is 5′ x 6′. I run into bathrooms much smaller than this all the time, but it gives you a feel for what the difference between 16 mm and 19 mm effective focal length.
As you can see, you can see from the animated GIF above, the difference but is noticeable but not huge. Is it worth $450? It’s hard to say. It depends on if you have $450 laying around. On the one hand I love having 16 mm available for shooting bathrooms like this (it’s almost the only time I use 16 mm) but on the other hand in the overall scheme of things small bathrooms don’t matter much. I would never suggest going wider than 16 mm, but 16 mm is handy.
Dwayne decided that in the end, having an extra 3 mm in effective focal length was not worth $450 to him.