Canon 10-22 worth of buying?

[jonnen]

Hi!
One lens I really miss at the moment is a super wide angle one. There are very good primes but one possible option would be new Canon EF-S 10-22 zoom lens. What do you think about it? I saw very nice pics in another thread taken with this lens but need some additional opinions of it or about equally good options for it. I have at the moment the following lenses: 18-55, 28-135 IS, 35-70, 50/1.8, and 75-300. So, I think 10-22 could really be a lens which I am missing if looking the focal lenghts.

Thanks a lot in advance for any comments and suggestions!

Jonne

[mikaelwardhana]

Hi Jonnen,
As you may have known, I am not a landscape photographer and I rarely need something that wide for my work.
If I were you, the first thing I would do is upgrading your lens arsenal. You have some "okay" lenses there but not the best around.

I would personally get some L lenses that I know for myself will blow you away.
17-40 f4L is a perfect choice for landscape. (many professional landscaper use this lens). And it is not that expensive as well.
and a 70-200 f4L for the long zoom.

but that of course is just my personal opinion.

Cheers Finland!

[jonnen]

Thanks Mikael!
The 17-40L is in my list but I am not sure about it at the moment because I already have 18-55 kit lens and the focal lengths of these two are quite overlapping. And 17 mm is not quite wide with 1.6 crop factor. I know that the picture quality is much better with 17-40L of course than with the kit lens. Well, sometimes it is very difficult to decide between few nice options...

Jonne

[Kevin Barrett]

Originally Posted by jonnen

Hi!
One lens I really miss at the moment is a super wide angle one. There are very good primes but one possible option would be new Canon EF-S 10-22 zoom lens. What do you think about it? I saw very nice pics in another thread taken with this lens but need some additional opinions of it or about equally good options for it. I have at the moment the following lenses: 18-55, 28-135 IS, 35-70, 50/1.8, and 75-300. So, I think 10-22 could really be a lens which I am missing if looking the focal lenghts.

Thanks a lot in advance for any comments and suggestions!

Jonne

The 10-22 is just great fun. It's sharp, light and built fairly well. It was a "must have" lens for my bag. I've not heard of anyone dissappointed with the lens as of yet. It does exhibit a little bit of CA, but not to the point where I would even call it a problem. It's a stellar piece.

Kevin

[jonnen]

Thanks Kevin!
I was just lookin incredible pics at PBase taken with 10-22 lens. It is quite expensive lens but you can really get good results with it. And it includes the focal lenghts which are missing from my camera bag.

Jonne

[Kevin Barrett]

First impression is "That's quite expensive for what you get!" However, after working with the lens a bit you soon realize that
it's money well spent. I do not think you'll be dissappointed. The 10-22 opens up a realm of photographic possibilities.

[jonnen]

Hi Kevin!
I think you right about this lens and its possibilities in photography. And it will be suited also for street stuff as you mentioned in my other thread. Thanks for your opinions!

Jonne

[Michele]

I am thinking about this lens as well. What did you mean by "CA", Kevin? I am not familar with that term.

Regards,
Michele

[Kevin Barrett]

Originally Posted by Michele

I am thinking about this lens as well.* What did you mean by "CA", Kevin? I am not familiar with that term.

Regards,
Michele

CA = Chromatic Abberation ( a fancy term for color fringing). It is so minimal with this lens that I hesitated to
discuss it. Essentially, CA will sometimes be seen as a color fringe where the contrast changes significantly at
the edges of the frame. This is can be more evident in photos where the aperture is wide-open etc.

Again, I cannot stress how minor of an issue it is... If and when it does happen in a photo, it can be easily fixed
in photoshop. I would enthusiastically buy this lens again tomorrow.

[deepjay]

Kevin,
It is a very good lens, and will add a lot to your armamentarium. When you get or try it, move the camera up and down to see that there is aberration at the wide end. It can be either useful or a pain. Just be aware of it, and utilize it.

[yalazy]

Jonnen,

do get the 10-22 if you want something wider and already have the kitlens. It is a very good performer, and I think you will thoroughly enjoy it for landscapes. Skip the 17-40 for now, at f/8 the difference from the kitlens is not huge in final ,print. About CA, my 10-22 shows less of it than the 17-40 I once owned. Sharpness from the 10-22 is as good as 17-40/16-35, it's just a LOT wider, and edges can get a stretched/distorted look due to the extreme perspective.

[jonnen]

Hi everybody!
Thanks a lot for comments and suggestions! I decided to buy Tokina 12-24 lens because it is some 350 euros cheaper than Canon 10-22 ánd 100 euros cheaper than Sigma's and Tamron's UWA lenses. Almost all user comments of Tokina are very favourable. And the pics I have seen taken with Tokina are very nice indeed.

Jonne