can't decide.....

kwaichi

I have an assignment to take some photos for the restaurant. They want me to take some with the whole dining area and the bar. My question is I am using a canon 40D and I need a wide angle. Should I get the EFS 10-22mm or the 17-40L? I never tried the 10-22 so I don't know how much wider it will get. Suggestions??:dunno

mountainhouse

I have both - LOTS wider. Angles of view are 107.5 degrees vs. 75 degrees (based on my rough estimate of 28mm equivalent). At 10mm, standing in a corner, you can just about see both walls - it's wide. Seems like a big difference to me, but it will depend on how you shoot. Good luck with the assignment.

Art Scott

kwaichi wrote:

I have an assignment to take some photos for the restaurant. They want me to take some with the whole dining area and the bar. My question is I am using a canon 40D and I need a wide angle. Should I get the EFS 10-22mm or the 17-40L? I never tried the 10-22 so I don't know how much wider it will get. Suggestions??

I would suggest the 10-22 and also it would depend on if I was shooting during the hours they are open to the public or not.
Might also consider shooting vertical as a pano and stitching it together....that would be real cool.

No matter what shoot off a tripod.

kwaichi

thanks for the inputs. My other question is how about the quality of the pictures? I am going to shoot with a tripod and the restaurant is about 2,400sqft. I know the price is just $50 different so it's not a big deal. Anyone has some pictures with the 10-22mm?

mountainhouse

This is more to give you an idea of the difference in angle of view. I think the quality on the 10-22mm is pretty impressive.

10-22mm photo

17-40mm photo

Just shot them a moment ago from the same point using a 30D. I only put in the extra effort because you're from the Central Valley.

Art Scott

kwaichi wrote:

thanks for the inputs. My other question is how about the quality of the pictures? I am going to shoot with a tripod and the restaurant is about 2,400sqft. I know the price is just $50 different so it's not a big deal. Anyone has some pictures with the 10-22mm?

I'm not a canon person but "L" glass is supposedly ..... DA BOMB.....but I have read on here raves of non L being just a good as or superior....

Ziggy???? You around?????

mountainhouse

The Digital Picture has reviews with samples from both:

Samples of the 10-22mm
Samples of the 17-40mm

kwaichi

Mountainhouse, thanks for your effort. But man, that's a huge different of the angle. Did you ever use it to shoot any portrait with that 10-22mm?

mountainhouse wrote:

This is more to give you an idea of the difference in angle of view. I think the quality on the 10-22mm is pretty impressive.

10-22mm photo

17-40mm photo

Just shot them a moment ago from the same point using a 30D. I only put in the extra effort because you're from the Central Valley.

jrmyrnsm

If your doing interior shots I'm sure you will appreciate the 10mm over the 17mm. I have only heard good things about the 10-22mm lens from reviews and friends who have it and unless you are planning on going to a full-frame in the near future I'd have to say it sounds like it would be better for you. Another idea is to try and go to Best Buy and bring your camera and try out the 10-22mm to see how it compares to any of the other lenses with at 17mm wide end. Good luck with your decision... as for me, I am counting the days until I can get my hands on a real wide angle!

mountainhouse

kwaichi wrote:

Mountainhouse, thanks for your effort. But man, that's a huge different of the angle. Did you ever use it to shoot any portrait with that 10-22mm?

Welcome. People? Near the center. If they're off to the side, it's pretty ugly. Happy to send you some full sized samples if you want to PM me your email. Good luck with your choice.

ziggy53

Kwaichi,

If you can, actually measure the room, scale the dimensions and lay it out on paper, and actually measure the Field-of-View/Angle-of-View (FOV/AOV) required for where you need to shoot. Then you will know for sure what you need. The lens you need depends not only on the room dimensions but also where you need to shoot from.

Shooting a long and narrow room from the short side of the room is completely different that shooting the same room from the middle of a long side.

You can also use stitching techniques to combine multiple shots into one image.

If there is a graphic artist involved in the project try to work with them so you know what final sizes and aspect ratios are required for the project.

You may want to make multiple images if the room is organized into "zones" or "areas". The bar area may get lost in a single image, but if you use a bar "inset" image it may work better. The bar might also look better from a different angle than what works for the rest of the room.

Some careful planning can make a big difference in the tools that you bring and the time that you spend on the shoot itself.

Zanotti

12mm on a 30D




I have the Sigma 10-22 and really like it for these kind of things.

Z

Scott_Quier

I'm going to suggest you take this in a slightly different direction.

If you plan to shoot a number of these sort of projects, then I think, maybe, the 10-22 is not the lens for the job. Even at 22mm, this lens is not distortion free (is any lens really distortion free?). There is enough distortion in the image that you will probably run into issues attempting a stitch pano.

You might be better off with either your planned purchase of the 24-105 f/4L. If you shoot at somewhere between 30mm and 50mm, in portrait orientation, you will probably be able to get everthing from floor to ceiling in the shot - depending on the size of the room(s) and you you might be able to create a stitched pano. However, with out proper pano gear, I fear you will have perspecive/paralax issues with objects close to the camera.

Another thought might be to investigate the usability of tilt/shift TS-E 24mm f/3.5L and some real pano gear (do a search looking for comments from Andy on his pano setup). A more expensive acquisition to be sure, but will, I think, produce much better images.

All of that having been said, the 10-22mm is a very fun lens with very good quality optics. If you're interested, there's a "review you can use" here.

mountainhouse

Scott_Quier wrote:

Even at 22mm, this lens is not distortion free (is any lens really distortion free?). There is enough distortion in the image that you will probably run into issues attempting a stitch pano.

Is this still an issue if you use something like Lensfix to correct the distortion? Tnx,

Scott_Quier

mountainhouse wrote:

Is this still an issue if you use something like Lensfix to correct the distortion? Tnx,

No cluedunno

ziggy53

mountainhouse wrote:

Is this still an issue if you use something like Lensfix to correct the distortion? Tnx,

The short answer is "yes", it is an issue. When you correct for barrel distortion, the sides of the image will tend to warp. Unless you recrop the image after you correct for distortion, and unless you have accounted for the additional crop in terms of overlap, the stitching software will not be able to cope.

If the distortion software does its job correctly and completely and if you "have" allowed for enough overlap, you can wind up with a pretty decent stitch.

Lenses with complicated distortion patterns, and some of the super-wide and super-zooms (typically those with a fairly wide angle as well as telephoto) tend not to be corrected well with any current software.

I am most familiar with the Sigma 10-20mm and the Sigma 18-50mm, f2.8 (non-"Macro") and, of those two, the 18-50mm stitches rather well and looks realistic with the stitching and panoramic software that I have and use.

Here are some early samples:

http://www.clevr.com/user/ziggy53

ziggy53

ziggy53 wrote:

...

Here are some early samples:

http://www.clevr.com/user/ziggy53

P.S. I don't use the software on that site. I use freeware that I have collected and set up on my machine.

TaDa

I owned the Canon 10-22 before buying the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. The Canon is a great piece of glass. Only reason that I went with the Tokina is the constant f/2.8 aperture. I also own the Canon 17-55 IS and can tell you that the difference between 10 and 17mm is H U G E !

The 10-22 is a great piece of glass