Lens Advice

dlplumer · July 10, 2008

I use the new Canon XSi, 17-85 IS, 70-200 F4, 300 F/4 IS 1.4 TC. I want a good wide angle lens for landscape shots etc.

If money were no object, what would you recommend. Or, should I use my 17-85 because the quality difference between it and say a 10-22 f/3.5 L is not that great????

Thanks,

Dan

Manfr3d · July 10, 2008

Your choices are:

Sigma 10-20mm/4-5.6 EX
Canon 10-22mm/3.5-4.5 EF-S
Tokina 12-24mm/4.0 AT-X DX

They are all very similar, pick one
repending on your preferences.

kini62 · July 10, 2008

Add the Tokina 11-16/2.8 to that list. Supposed to be the best of the bunch.

Manfr3d wrote:

Your choices are:

Sigma 10-20mm/4-5.6 EX
Canon 10-22mm/3.5-4.5 EF-S
Tokina 12-24mm/4.0 AT-X DX

They are all very similar, pick one
repending on your preferences.

greenpea · July 10, 2008

kini62 wrote:

Add the Tokina 11-16/2.8 to that list. Supposed to be the best of the bunch.

A couple of weeks ago, I picked up a Tokina 11-16/2.8 (for Nikon). Super sharp, fast, well built, love the lens. Prior to that I had been borrowing a friend's Tokina 12-24/4 also a great lens.

Cameron · July 10, 2008

I own the Canon 10-22mm and LOVE it. Very sharp, good build quality. My brother owns the 4/3 mount version of the Sigma 10-20 and that is also a spectacular lens.

To help you see the difference between the 17mm you currently have at the wide end and what 10mm would look like, I took a photo at each focal length using my 10-22mm. This is just out my back door so the subject matter is boring, but it demonstrates the difference in the field of view.

17mm

10mm

kdog · July 10, 2008

dlplumer wrote:

I use the new Canon XSi, 17-85 IS, 70-200 F4, 300 F/4 IS 1.4 TC. I want a good wide angle lens for landscape shots etc.

If money were no object, what would you recommend. Or, should I use my 17-85 because the quality difference between it and say a 10-22 f/3.5 L is not that great????

Thanks,

Dan

Dan,

In the ranges where they overlap, I find the image quality to be better on the EF-S 10-22 than on the 17-85. But more importantly, the difference between 10mm and 17mm is huge. 17 is a wide lens. However, 10mm gives you a whole new way of looking at the world.

Aside from simply having a wider view, you can do some creative stuff with the wide-angle distortion. Here's an example that sort of illustrates my point.

-joel

dlplumer · July 10, 2008

Thanks everyone. Very helpful. I had seen some Amazon reviews that suggest the 10-22 is soft in the corners, but from what I see and from what you all suggest, it is a good choice. I'd prefer to stay with Canon, and I like that it is an L quality lens.

Thanks Cameron for sharing the differences in focal length. Mighty generous of you. And Joel, that is one great shot

kdog · July 10, 2008

Psst, the Canon EF-S 10-22 isn't an L lens.

dlplumer · July 10, 2008

kdog wrote:

Psst, the Canon EF-S 10-22 isn't an L lens.

Right

Sorry about that.

It is the 17-40 that is an L lens. Soooooo, should I get the 10-22 or the 17-40 given that I already own the 17-85 IS

kdog · July 10, 2008

dlplumer wrote:

Right Sorry about that.

It is the 17-40 that is an L lens. Soooooo, should I get the 10-22 or the 17-40 given that I already own the 17-85 IS

The 17-85 is not a bad lens at all. I honestly don't see the 17-40L in your future. I'd go with the 10-22 which will allow you to capture things you can't capture now. For example, the 10-22 captures an entire room by standing in the corner. Or it will allow you to capture your whole back yard from a corner. That sort of stuff. When we were in the slot canyons, my shooting partner (anwmn1) was jealous that I was able to get much wider than him, and so he bought a 7mm zoom

(Olympus).

When you do decide that you need better quality in the 17+ range, I'd go with the EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS. It's oh so sweet. (I can almost hear Ziggy typing now in agreement. :giggle )

Cameron · July 10, 2008

kdog wrote:

The 17-85 is not a bad lens at all. I honestly don't see the 17-40L in your future. I'd go with the 10-22 which will allow you to capture things you can't capture now. For example, the 10-22 captures an entire room by standing in the corner. Or it will allow you to capture your whole back yard from a corner. That sort of stuff. When we were in the slot canyons, my shooting partner (anwmn1) was jealous that I was able to get much wider than him, and so he bought a 7mm zoom (Olympus).

When you do decide that you need better quality in the 17+ range, I'd go with the EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS. It's oh so sweet. (I can almost hear Ziggy typing now in agreement. :giggle )

I'm not Ziggy, but I wholeheartedly agree!! You'll be much happier expanding your range than duplicating it. The 17-85 is weakest (has most distortion) near 17mm so the duplication at that end isn't a bad thing.

When/if you start to feel limited by the quality of your 17-85 you can think about upgrading that, but for now GO FOR THE 10-22mm!

kdog · July 10, 2008

CSwinton wrote:

I'm not Ziggy, but I wholeheartedly agree!! You'll be much happier expanding your range than duplicating it.

I'm glad we agree.

BTW, just to be clear, my comment about Ziggy was directed towards the recommendation of the EFS 17-55, which I know Ziggy is a big fan of, and not the 10-22.

Cheers,
-joel

dlplumer · July 10, 2008

Thanks very much guys. That makes a lot of sense.

Tee Why · July 10, 2008

If money is no object and you want the most versatile UWA lens, then I'd say the Canon 10-22.

If money is an object, then the Sigma 10-20.

If you are wiling to compromise the 10mm end and versatility for pure resolution power, then I'd say Tokina 11-16.

greenpea · July 11, 2008

Tee Why wrote:

If money is no object and you want the most versatile UWA lens, then I'd say the Canon 10-22.

If money is an object, then the Sigma 10-20.

If you are wiling to compromise the 10mm end and versatility for pure resolution power, then I'd say Tokina 11-16.

I believe the Tokina is the only f2.8 of the bunch.

faust0matic · July 12, 2008

Well, if you're shooting a lot in low light, the Canon 10-22mm/3.5-4.5 EF-S is OK, but not great. I get maybe 1 keeper for every 20-30 shots. However, I love this lens. I was sad to see it go, but my new primary body is a 1D MKIIn, so it's useless to me now. If I had not switched to an APS-H camera, I'd have held onto that lens forever. As for it being L glass, it is not an L lens. But, I did read a review of it and the guy called Canon and asked. He was told that the glass is L quality, but the lack of weatherproofing and the EFS status keep it from getting an L rating. Assuming this is true, that is. I had no complaints with this lens.

Tee Why · July 13, 2008

Canon 10-22 and Tokina 11-16 compared.
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/1022v1116

Ric Grupe · July 13, 2008

If money were no object

Which it always is...

Then...

...get the 5D and a 16-35L...:wow

dlplumer · July 13, 2008

Ric Grupe wrote:

Which it always is...

Then...

...get the 5D and a 16-35L...:wow

Why the 5 D over the 40D or the 1D or the new 5 D if it ever shows up?

Ric Grupe · July 13, 2008

dlplumer wrote:

Why the 5 D over the 40D or the 1D or the new 5 D if it ever shows up?

Any full frame.

The 5D can be had relatively inexpensive until the 19th when the rebate expires.

Tee Why · July 13, 2008

Ric Grupe wrote:

Which it always is...

Then...

...get the 5D and a 16-35L...:wow

Nope, 1DsMIII and 14mm prime.

Manfr3d · July 14, 2008

Tee Why wrote:

Nope, 1DsMIII and 14mm prime.

You mean, 1DsIII and 8mm circular fisheye?

faust0matic · July 14, 2008

I'm holding out for a 1Ds MK IV w/5mm 360 degree fisheye f/0.05. I hear it comes boxed with the new 6000EX nuclear powered flash unit. Finally...I'll be able to be behind the camera and in the photo at the same time, no matter how dark it is outside!

Manfr3d · July 14, 2008

faust0matic wrote:

I'm holding out for a 1Ds MK IV w/5mm 360 degree fisheye f/0.05. I hear it comes boxed with the new 6000EX nuclear powered flash unit. Finally...I'll be able to be behind the camera and in the photo at the same time, no matter how dark it is outside!

Thats great, but does it come with a invisibility suit for the photographer?

faust0matic · July 14, 2008

HA! Yeah, just like Predator. But it's still tough to shop out that blurry patch. Maybe I should hold out for the 1Ds MKV...I hear they'll have that bug worked out by then.

Lens Advice

Comments