Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5

[steve_m]

I've been thinking about purchasing a new wide angle lens.


I currently own a 24-105L f4.0. I am used to the high quality images I get from this lens. I've tried other lenses such as the kit lens that came with my XTi 1.6 crop factor body, the EF75-300 non L and have been very disappointed with the quality of images. I don't want to go down that road again.


I need a wider angle than my 24-105L provides on certain shots. I was thinking about the 17-40L but I'm afraid that won't be wide enough either. With the 1.6 crop body of the XTi, my only other option is theCanon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5.


Will I be disappointed with the image sharpness/quality compared to my 24-105L if I go with the EFS 10-22mm? Or, should I just sacrifice the wide angle and go with the EF 17-40mmL?

[I chase light]

I had the same decision to make, between the 17-40 and 10-22. I rented both lenses for a week in order to decide. The "hands-on" use, in my day-to-day photography, was ultimately more valuable than reading all the reviews and advice.


I would really suggest you do the same. FOR ME, the choice was the 17-40, and I have never regretted it. It may be different for you, especially because you would have quite a large amount of focal length overlap between the 24-105 and the 17-40. I did not find significant sharpness difference in the lenses (and I tend to be a stickler for sharpness), but I did like the color rendition better in the 17-40 (personal preference).


Even on a 1.6 body, I found it difficult to keep myself out of the shot on thewide end of the 10-22. Also,unless you are trying for that type of distortion, straight lines and objects in the foreground will be out of proportion. This can be fixed in post-processing.


Best of luck...I am sure you cannot go too far wrong with either lens...


Yours,


James

[Mark Elberson]

I own both the EF-S 10-22 and the EF 24-105L. The 24-105 remains on my camera 90% of the time, but it does leave a little to be desired at the wide end though. The 10-22 fills that void perfectly. It's the closest you can get to feeling like you have a full-framer. The exaggerated perspective and FOV is incredible. It's such a fun lens. I was also considering the 17-40 because I anticpate upgrading to a full frame body at some point. The difference between 10mm (107 degrees FOV) and 17mm (77 degrees FOV) is light years apart. If I am shooting landscapes the 10-22 is always with me. I have been very satisfied with its sharpness and would buy it again.

[Daniel Browning]

Will I be disappointed with the image sharpness/quality compared to my 24-105L if I go with the EFS 10-22mm?

First of all, let me say that the 10-22 is a fantastic ultra super wide angle lens.


Second: because it's an ultra super wide angle lens, it really doesn't make sense to compare it with the 17-40 or 24-105. That's like comparing an apple with an orange, or a Boeing 747 with a fighter jet, or a motorcycle with a car. They're all good at what they do, but they're so different that it really doesn't make sense to compare them.


Third, you need to think about what field of view you want. 24mm is not wide enough on your XTi. If 17mm will be wide enough, and you want a good range into the 40mm or 50mm end, then there are many lenses to choose from:

• 17-40 f/4 L
• 17-55 f/2.8 IS
• Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
• Sigma 18-50 f/2.8
• Etc.

But the Canon 10-22 is *not* one of them, because it's a completely and totally different type of lens. Buying it to use just at 17-22mm is a mistake, in my opinion: many other 17-50 f/2.8 lenses are faster, better, and cheaper.


But if you *do* want to use something wider than 17mm, then you should consider the 10-22mm, because it's an excellent lens in that range. There are other choices from Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina as well.


Some photographers would not be happy with the 10-22 + 24-105, because they use the 17-50 range so much that they would be constantly switching lenses. The 17-50 is the most "typical" range.


But I love ultra wide angle fields of view, personally, so I would highly recommend the Canon 10-22.

[Tony Printezis]

Steve,


I have all three lenses you mentioned. I got the 17-40 first, as my general purpose lens on my XTi and I loved it. But I have to say since I got the 10-22 and the 24-105 I don't use my 17-40 as much (only in certain situations). The 10-22 and the 24-105 compliment each other very nicely (when I want to travel "light", these are the only two lenses I carry). As it's already been said, the focal length difference between 10mm and 17mm (on a crop body) is huge. And I personally love shooting extra wide. It's not for all situations and you can totally overdo the effect, but I personally love it.


Regarding image quality, the 10-22 it's maybe not quite as sharp as the 17-40, but it's sharp enough so that I don't need to switch to the 17-40 for focal lengths between 17 and 22. Also, remember that typically extra wide lenses might not be as sharp as longer ones. And, BTW, some folks claim that the 10-22 outperforms in some respects the 17-40 when the latter is mounted on a FF body.


If you're interested, get in touch and I can point you to some shots I've taken with the 10-22 so that you can check them out.


Tony

[steve_m]

Tony,


It would be great to see your images. Can you post a link?

[Tim]

I know that the Tokina 11-16 has been getting great reviews, if you can rent that one and the 10-22 you might want to compare them.

[Tony Printezis]

Can you post a link?

I'd rather not, as I'm worried all my bandwidth will be sucked in. Can you somehow get in touch with my profile?


Tony

[steve_m]

Tony,


I sent a request through your profile.


Thanks!


Steve

[Tony Printezis]

Steve,


I send you a message through your profile. Did you get it?


Tony


PS Sorry everyone for the spam, I'm still trying to work out how the forum works.