|
Author
|
|
clockkicker
New here
Registered: March 2007
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sun March 18, 2007
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
size, weight, price
|
|
Cons:
|
limited usefulness, EF-S mount only
|
|
I am shooting on a Rebel xti, so 18mm wasn't nearly wide enough with my 1.6x crop factor. That's why they made this lens--it is an EF-S mount only (basically all canon D-SLRs except the 5D and the 1D...the REALLY expensive full frame cameras!), so when you're shooting 17 or 18mm, you're really shooting close to 30mm. With this lens, you can shoot as wide as 10mm (actually 16mm)! The only way you can get wider with a canon lens is to shoot with a full frame camera with the 14mm lens or the 15mm fisheye.
I use this lens mainly to take "crazy" pictures. Shoot up close to someones face (can still focus at a surprisingly close distance) and they look like horses with long faces. Get them to puff out their cheeks and laugh at the result. This lens is not for taking flattering portraits, that's for sure, but the results you can get by getting in CLOSE are impossible to get with your standard lenses, even those that call themselves wide-angle (at least not on an EF-S body).
The size and weight are too good to be true.
I have a 24-105 IS L lens, and I really believe this lens is as good quality as that lens, at least as far as IMAGE quality goes. The build is not quite as sturdy, which is why I'm giving it a 9 instead of a 10, but I do not think this should affect one's decision. It is still much better build than most of the lens EF-S mount lenses canon has made. This is a professional piece of equipment. Just don't be too rough with it.
This lens is obviously great for landscapes and interiors too, but I haven't done too much with that. If you are going to be doing outdoor landscapes, definitely get the lens hood--it doesn't come with it unfortunately. However, I have taken quite a few pictures outdoors without it and not actually had any problems with flare even at 10mm. Someone addressed this potential issue when they made it, and they did something to limit it. Good work Canon!
I was deciding between this and the Canon 15mm fisheye when I chose this lens. At 10mm, this lens to me takes just as interesting and fun pictures as a fisheye (it bends lines up close), though the results are not quite as distorted--it actually is possible to make the lines still look straight whereas with a fisheye it is not except with post shot software.
If you don't have too many lenses already, maybe you should buy a lens like the 24-105 or 17-55, something more versatile. However, if you already have a little arsenal and are looking for something to add some "color" to your photography, this could be the lens for you. Highly Recommended.
Other lenses I own with which this lens is being compared to: 50mm 1.4, 100mm macro 2.8, 18-55mm (the kit lens--aka a horrible, horrible lens), 24-105mm IS L 4.0. All on a Canon XTi body (400D).
|
|
|
|
milkod2001
Forum Regular
Registered: January 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1489
|
|
Review Date: Sun April 8, 2007
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: £500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP,10-22 MM
|
|
Cons:
|
A BIT EXPENSIVE
|
|
If u are to landscape photography this lens is a MUST BUY,i was deciding between this lens and SIGMA 10-20. I've tried both and have to say this one is better in all aspects/ overall sharpness, colors.../, this lens is actually like Canon L series lens/ UD Glass.../
Only one thing from negative aspects, this lens in not coming with lens hood, for the price u pay it should have been there
Highly Recommended
Milan
|
|
|
|
|
silkstone
Loves the place
Registered: January 2005
Location: Silkstone Common, Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 5719
|
|
Review Date: Wed September 26, 2007
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: £460.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, low distortion, residual value
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost
|
|
It was a close run thing between the Canon 10-22, the Sigma 10-20 and the Tamron 11-18, all of which have had good reviews. The Tokina 12-24 was also on the list, but I really wanted to go as wide as possible. In the end the cashback voucher for the Canon lens that came with the 30D swayed the decision, so the final price was comparable with the competitors.
My other superwide lens is the Sigma 12-24 - aka 'Popeye' - and this really is a brute, being a full-frame lens with a crystal ball as the front element. The APS-C format Canon 10-22 is altogether a different animal - much lighter and no larger than the Canon 17-40L.
The build quality is good but not quite up to 'L' standards and there is no weather-sealing, but overall I have no complaints. No lens hood is supplied, although it is questionable whether a hood is really much use with such a wide angle lens, especially since it has to be sized for the shortest focal length. If you have the 17-40L, the EW-83E supplied with that is perfect for the 10-22.
Sharpness is generally good but tails off a little at the edges - not unusual for this type of lens. A key feature of the Canon 10-22 is the very low barrel distortion even at 10mm, and any distortion that does occur is easily solved by the automatic lens correction features in Bibble and DxO. Chromatic aberration is low although some purple fringing can be provoked in overexposed or very high contrast scenes. I haven't noticed any particular susceptibility to flare, even without a hood.
A superwide lens can be very useful for landscapes and buildings if you can't stand far enough back with a normal lens, but my main use of the Canon 10-22 is for interior shots. There's no need to build an extension or buy a larger house, just photograph the interior at 10mm and it will look huge. Every estate agent should have one. 
|
|
|
|
|
fionaB
Growing roots
Registered: September 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 9531
|
|
Review Date: Sat June 14, 2008
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: £373.99
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lightweight, versatile
|
|
Cons:
|
no lens hood, EF-S, not EF
|
|
I am rating this lens at a 9 instead of a 10 because I am mightily disappointed in canon that they expect you to pay in some cases nearly £500, THEN expect you to fork out another £30 for a lens hood.
A bit disapointing also is the fact that it is an EF-S lens and not an EF lens, which doesnt effect me at the moment as im shooting on a 400D and a 30D BUT there is no gaurantee i wont be in the position to upgrade to full frame at some point in time and for such an expensive lens it seems a shame that it is no use to full frame photographers.
Anyway now thats off my chest on to the lens itself; a fabulous bit of kit that numerous reviews have rated at L series glass quality. I cant comment on that as i have no L series glass to compare it with, but what i can say is that it is pin sharp, and very little distortion at the widest angles, and little to no chromatic aberation.
as already mentioned disappointing that canon dont supply the hood, but having used it in bright sunlight i found no obvious flaring, eventually i will get a hood but the quality of the glass is such that its not an absolute necessity to begin with!
Originally it was a toss up between an ultra wide angle and an IS zoom.
Thinking long and hard and asking a few folk their opinions made me realise that the wide angle suited my style of photography better than a telephoto.
So that decided it was on to which one...... the sigma 10-20mm or the canon 10-22mm
the price was the first thing that swayed me to the sigma. Having already got a fabulous sigma lens i thought i had total confidence in them.......... but on reading a lot of reviews i discovered that there seem to be a high incidence of faulty or bad lenses.
So reliability and the faster lens that canon offered as well as the high reviews of the image quality eventually persuaded me to stick with the canon.
Am i glad i did? most definately!
Fi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pixalo Photography Community
