Canon 10-22 EF-S

IanBestPhot

IanBestPhot

Suspended / Banned
Messages
258
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
Been Pondering one of these for a little while now to use for automotive photography (statics) and eventually a rig in time but is it worth it? I have got a 7D and currently use a 17-55 ef-s f/2.8 and love the combination but does anybody know if the 10-22 pairs well with the 7D before I make the jump??

Cheers

Ian
 
Yes very well

I've the Sigma 10-20mm and am very pleased with it - be careful you don't get your feet in the shot, esp wide open :)
 
andyred said:
Yes very well

I've the Sigma 10-20mm and am very pleased with it - be careful you don't get your feet in the shot, esp wide open :)
Click to expand...

Thats great! is it really that wide! Never used an UWA so not sure what to expect!
 
IanBestPhot said:
Thats great! is it really that wide! Never used an UWA so not sure what to expect!
Click to expand...

I was very surprised at the difference it makes.

I don't use mine as often as I should, but do enjoy using it when it comes out...
 
Got mine just after xmas to use with my 650d and love it :)
 
You do get a little bit of a fisheye affect at the 10mm end, but it's well worth it if taking landscape shots. There is a huge difference between 10mm and 17mm especially on a crop.

You do lose the f/2.8 of course especially as the 22mm end, but the 17-55 can be a little soft unless stepped down anyway.
 
I support everything said above particularly that it is very very wide. In fact I found that at 10mm it was too wide. With landscape photography you get in an awful lot of scenery at 10mm. So much so that I found that it was difficult to pick out landmarks as they were so small.

Personally I found that when I was using it with my 7D I set it at about 14mm to get the shots I wanted. This also avoided the fisheye effect referred to above.

This is not a criticism, it is great to have the extra width should you need it.
 
When they say wide, it's about 170 degrees on the longer side, so great in landscape, or in portrait really drags the clouds in.

Be aware that at 10mm their is some colour aberration. Lightroom profiles takes mine right out so I'm guessing it's a common thing.
 
14mm on a 7D at a 1.6 crop is pretty close to 24mm; the default low end for Canons 24-70/24-105 lenses, a co-incidence? :)
 
jmc41 said:
14mm on a 7D at a 1.6 crop is pretty close to 24mm; the default low end for Canons 24-70/24-105 lenses, a co-incidence? :)
Click to expand...
24mm on FF is perhaps best focal length, it isn't toooo wide making everything far away, and it is just wide enough to get most things in. My 24-105L is all I need most of the time.

I also use 17-40mm f4L on FF, and wow it's really wide, the trick to wide shots is to get an interesting foreground. With automotive, it allows you to get more environment with the car, perhaps not ideal at motor shows, but it is very desirable for commercial shots.
 
IanBestPhot said:
does anybody know if the 10-22 pairs well with the 7D before I make the jump??
Click to expand...

Oh, yes. You really do need to rethink some of your methodology when using an UWA. Things tend to look either surprisingly big, or surprisingly small. In the latter case it can be quite a challenge to find a composition that helps prevent the very small things getting lost in the wide expanses.
 
I recently got a Canon 10-22 to go alongside my 17-55 2.8. It's so much wider than I imagined, but I love it! It did take some getting used to at first, especially as Frank mentioned with things appearing surprisingly small and distant.
 
I'm a bit confused by the fisheye comments as this lens isn't a fisheye lens :thinking: I wonder if people are confusing perspective "distortion" (something that all lenses display) with fisheye?

Anyway, these lenses tend to be well corrected and will very probably show less distortion at and around the 17mm mark and even at their widest than a quality 17-50mm zoom will at 17mm.

Having said that, I had the Canon 10-22mm and changed to a Sigma 12-24mm as I found that the Canon suffered relatively more distortion and vignetting. The Sigma is however 2mm less wide and every mm has an effect at this end.
 
Got one of these 9 months ago, absolutley love it, but I've just bought a Canon 6D which means I cannot use this lens, though I do love the 6D
 
I purchased the Canon 10-22mm last year and I have to say that I haven't been impressed at all. The resolution towards the edges is absolutely awful at wider apertures (below f8), and even beyond this range isn't never impressive.

That's not to say that I haven't been satisfied with any shots which I've taken with it, but in terms of resolution I'd have to say it's the poorest lens that I own.
 
When you go to the wider end of the lens there is obviously some distortion! Sometime I quite like the effect and if not it can always be corrected with software. As far as I know all lenses will have a fair amount of distortion when you get to 10-12mm!

I love mine (EFS 10-22mm) and whilst it's not exactly a walkabout lens, it definitely has it's place in my bag.
 
parhole4 said:
Got one of these 9 months ago, absolutley love it, but I've just bought a Canon 6D which means I cannot use this lens, though I do love the 6D
Click to expand...

I have also recently bought a 6D and was going to sell the 10-22 because even though I am keeping the 7D I really never used the 10-22. Took it out to take some sample shots for selling and remembered what a great lens it was. I immediately withdrew it from sale and have used it a lot since. Great lens. :thumbs: :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top