Reality check please

[Bill M.]

It all depends on what is more important to you and what you shoot most. If you really shoot a lot of landscapes then the 10-22 will open up a whole new world for you compared to the 28-135. As a general walk-around lens, the 24-70 or the 24-105 would be good choices. I started with a 17-40 for my 20D a few years back and then moved to the 24-105 and liked the extra tele range I had with it. Now that I primarily shoot with a 5DII, I keep the 24-105 on most of the time.


The 70-200 2.8 IS is certainly a great lens to have and if you do shoot a lot of action in low light, then its almost a necessity, but again, it all depends on your priorities right now and what you want to improve on immediately.


Good luck!

[Seth Tower]

The 10-22 was my favorite (zoom) lens on a 1.6x camera. It's truely revolutionary how W I D E 10mm is. I highly recommend it.

[Victor Pelino]

My walk around lens is my 24-105. Its the best lens for general/all purpose stuff and if you're choosing middle ground between the two things you like to do this is the lens. However, I have to say, you probably shouldn't settle for the middle ground if you're looking for a lens for these specific reasons. With that in mind I would probably cut the 24-70 out too. (FOR NOW! Its a great lens) So really that leaves you with the 10-22 and the 70-200. The 70-200 2.8 is probably my favorite zoom lens. I use if for everything. I live in rugged West Virginia in the U.S. and I've also traveled to every kind of environment our National Park system has to offer. (Swamps, Deserts, Mountains, Oceanic) and my 70-200 has taken a licking and keeps on clicking. So far she's had no dust or mechanical breakdowns. Plus you get a 2.8. thru out the focal length range. Add an extender and you've got a nifty extra macro on your side. I guess if I had my choice between an "L" series and any other lens I'm going to side with the "L" most every time. And for the last reason, the "s" series are nice but if you ever decided to upgrade you're going to want to sell it off. If dust is a problem where you live it's going to cut your resell value. Of course, no matter what you decide they're Canon. So you'll be happy with whatever you decide. Good luck.

[btaylor]

Well I just went down to my local shop and purchased the 10-22mm. (Quick I know!) I've only played around with it about the house but I'm stoked with the amount you can capture in the frame! I'll get a nice sunset shot out at Lake Moondarra out of town tonight and post it up for you all.


Cheers!

[LoneSierra]

Heya Ben.


The only one of your "possible" lenses I have experience with right now is the 10-22. I JUST got it for a weding on Saturday. This lens is amazing. It just gives you shots you never thought you could get.


If you want to do landscapes, you can't beat it. Talk about an impressive angle of view at 10mm. Also, architectual pictures are great. Definitely let's you get the picture you need.


A few thingsto keep in mind about the 10-22......wide angle lenses aren't just for "getting it all in", they are about the aspect of the picture. Things that are further away REALLY look further away. Angles and lines are dramatic, and can make a great effect. All of these are less dramatic the closer to 22 you get.


Also, you want to get as close as possible with this lens. You really have to be personal, and agressive with this lens. If you aren't close enough you get things you don't want in the picture, and you lose what this lens is made for.


As far as the lens being weather sealed, all of the moving parts are enclosed, but NOT sealed. The lens does move about a CM in and out, but it is always recessed behind the front of the lense, so if you put your filter on the front, it's very well protected. Also, you would want a THIN filter. It's going to cost you a lot for a good filter, but if you use a cheap one, you'll get more vignetting.


So, I don't know what to tell you about the other lenses, but there's some insight on this one. It's a GREAT lens. I'll post some pics if you'd like.


John

[btaylor]

[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.34/3624750722_5F00_b4cf69915f_5F00_b.jpg[/img]


Here's another shot with the 10-22mm taken over the weekend. I'm loving the contrast of this lens. 40D, 10-22mm @ 10mm, ISO 100, f/9, 1/160sec. Photo is straight out of the camera.

[LoneSierra]

Here's another shot with the 10-22mm taken over the weekend. I'm loving the contrast of this lens. 40D, 10-22mm @ 10mm, ISO 100, f/9, 1/160sec. Photo is straight out of the camera.

You know, I was noticing the other day.....I saw some pictures that were recently hung at work, and they were nature shots, all taken with a wide angle lens. It was obvious because on the left, and right quarters of the picture, everything was skewed, and I'm talking, if the pic is 2 feet wide, it starts showing 6 inches from the middle. Trees were no longer standing straight up and there was an obvious curve to the whole scene. I thought to myself "I could take a better quality shot than this with my 10-22."


The 10-22mm just controls it's distortion SO well. This picture you took would be noticeably curved if they used the same lens.


I'm so happy with that lens!

[LoneSierra]

Here's a picture taken with the 10-22. Unedited jpeg.





Well, I messed that up....I'll try again later.