canon ultra wide angle lens 10-22mm

Meeplemaiden

Meeplemaiden

Suspended / Banned
Messages
41
Name
Jules
Edit My Images
No
Hi there,
I bought this lens as a treat for myself not long ago and love it but the images don't seem to be particularly sharp when zoomed in to 100% on my computer. Is it something I'm doing or am I expecting too much?
 
barratt1988 said:
That apertures are you using and what body is this on?
Click to expand...

It is on my canon eos 500d and I have tried everything from 4.5 (obviously less dof) right through to 22. Not sure if it is that I am focussing on the wrong spot but the actual area that I focussed on seems quite soft when I look at it at home.
 
I use one of these on my 7D which I see is not far off the pixel count of your 500D.

I had a bit of a love hate relationship with this lens until I worked out a few things.

10mm is a VERY wide angle of view to cram down onto a 22x14 mm chip with 18 million pixels on it.

Individual details are going to be very small and therefore are not going to look too "sharp" at 100%. Contrast this with say a head and shoulders portrait, zoom into the eye at 100% and there is lots details there as you are viewing more pixels over the area of interest. Does that make sense?

I have also found focusing can be a bit hit and miss, so if I can I use live view. This lens also seems to suffer from field curvature, especially noticeable at 10mm and f3.5. This is where you can have the corners , or the centre sharply focused - but not both. The effect disappears as you stop down, and is only really noticeable if you pixel peep - which most of us do of course.

Do a few tripod/manual - Live View focus test shots to make sure the lens is OK, and if it is I think we all want too much from these lenses.

Here's one I did earlier :D


Small PSE11 photomerge 3591-3592-3593 by david.williams221162, on Flickr


2.0sec f5.6 10mm on a Gorillapod! and not sharpened much in post so could probably look sharper.

HTH

David.
 
Last edited:
Meeplemaiden said:
It is on my canon eos 500d and I have tried everything from 4.5 (obviously less dof) right through to 22. Not sure if it is that I am focussing on the wrong spot but the actual area that I focussed on seems quite soft when I look at it at home.
Click to expand...

I have the sigma 10-20mm which I know is a completely different lens but common rules apply. I tend to use it at f8 -11 for landscaoes as thats the 'sweetspot' the center should be sharo from 10mm onwards with the edges affected by the aparture and mm range. Can you not do a 'studio test' I.e fine line grid to check the focus
 
Oh my, the lens which was one of my favorite in the past, too bad i bought it because i was lucky to upgrade to full frame very fast, so couldn't use it much to justify it.

Here is one of the shots i've taken back in 2006 by this lens on 30D:

507594614_f5a2bbe04b_o.jpg
 
the canon should be better than a sigma ,jules can you post some photos from the canon and do you do any pp on the photos , i dont have a canon but i have a sigma and as phill says the sweet spot is around f8-f11 here is 2 taken first 1 at 12mm f11

the scottish car show 2013 by hoochy1, on Flickr

2nd one taken at f4 10mm


scout by hoochy1, on Flickr
 
hoochy1 said:
the canon should be better than a sigma ,jules can you post some photos from the canon and do you do any pp on the photos , i dont have a canon but i have a sigma and as phill says the sweet spot is around f8-f11 here is 2 taken first 1 at 12mm f11
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hoochy1/9356304443/
the scottish car show 2013 by hoochy1, on Flickr

2nd one taken at f4 10mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hoochy1/8574033365/
scout by hoochy1, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Why should the canon be better :s ive not seen much of the canon lens but lookin online softness is an issue with them as it is with all UWA lenses
 
most people rate the canon better iq wise phill from what i read i dont think there will be much in it tbh i have never had the canon so cant say for sure ,
 
hoochy1 said:
most people rate the canon better iq wise phill from what i read i dont think there will be much in it tbh i have never had the canon so cant say for sure ,
Click to expand...

I perhaps agree on some lenses but the new 12-24 sigma has upset canon as its kicked the canons a.ss haha. Anyways back on topic post come pics n we can take a look
 
Thanks for the feedback guys - umm, I'm new here so how do I post some pics (sorry, this is probably a really stupid question). I think it probably is a combination of a slight softness and operator error as I haven't had much practice with it yet. I have tried a little bit of pp on my photos, some more successful than others. It isn't really a huge issue unless I want to enlarge them to hang them on the wall, which at the mo I don't. I would appreciate your opinions (once I've found out how to upload them).
 
Meeplemaiden said:
Thanks for the feedback guys - umm, I'm new here so how do I post some pics (sorry, this is probably a really stupid question). I think it probably is a combination of a slight softness and operator error as I haven't had much practice with it yet. I have tried a little bit of pp on my photos, some more successful than others. It isn't really a huge issue unless I want to enlarge them to hang them on the wall, which at the mo I don't. I would appreciate your opinions (once I've found out how to upload them).
Click to expand...

Hi, to post pictures on here you can either upload them to the Forum Gallery (click on Galleries in the blue bar at the top of the page) with a 800 pixel wide/high and 200mb file size limit - OR - you can upload to any photo sharing website such as Flickr or Photo bucket etc and then copy the code into your post.

There is a guide to using Flickr HERE scroll down a bit for the instructions on using the latest version of Flickr

HTH

David
 
Last edited:
barratt1988 said:
Why should the canon be better :s ive not seen much of the canon lens but lookin online softness is an issue with them as it is with all UWA lenses
Click to expand...

The Canon is regarded as the best UWA for a Canon crop. It's also regarded as one of, if not the sharpest and suffers far less distortion than the others. Certainly, mine is sharp across the frame from f/5.6 onwards.

Can the OP post some examples of the softness?
 
Sorry for the delay, still finding my way around here. Hope this works...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92381970@N03/10509664685/
Settings: F16
1/6
ISO 200
Evaluative metering
AI focus AF
Focal length 16mm
This shot was taken handheld so it is possible that it maybe camera shake. The focus is about 1/3 the way up the trunk.
I felt that a lot of the detail of the bark of the tree trunk was soft but I'm not sure if this comes out properly in this pic as I found it most obvious at 100%. As I said, it's not a big issue, I was just wondering if it was something I was doing.

Here is another example with the same issue:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92381970@N03/10509504256/
Settings: F22
1/4
ISO100
Evaluative metering
Manual focus
Focal length 10mm
This time I used my tripod and the focus was about half way up the main trunk before the branches start.

(yes, I have a bit of a thing for tree trunks ;))
 
Last edited:




^^^^^^^^^
There you go, you need to copy the bbcode of the pic not the html link.

I've got a sigma 10-20 on a 550D and its sharp in the middle and the right hand side bit a little bit soft on the left hand side. Doesnt really affect images unless you pixel peep and I've never had anyone complain about prints from it. Where is your focus point when you shoot landscape for example are you focussing on something far away? Try focussing 1/3 into the scene and using f11-16. That's where mines sharpest :)

Looking at those 2 examples above, you have the tree trunk almost right under the nose of the camera and the canopy quite a distance away so will always notice it more on a photo like that due to the dof, even if you use a narrow aperture :)
 
Last edited:
Jules - the metadata is not available on those images - we can't see what settings you used, so it's hard to see why they look soft.
Can you please edit post the settings used for those shots - ta.
 
OK, I have to ask a really stupid question: what's the bb code? Forgive me, I'm a newb...
 
My thoughts on this...

I think if anything hand-held at 1/6 is going cause possible camera shake..so this could be part of the issue. (photo 1)

I would also think exposure wise...shooting up to the sky and exposing for the trees is going to see loss in detail as you go up the trunk...You could also look for the hyper focal distance as this might help maximize the sharpness.

Otherwise from just looking at them they seems ok to me...maybe try multiple exposures see if that helps with detail/sharpness.

or I could be completely wrong...
 
Thanks for your thoughts Danzaroonie, I think you are probably right on both counts and looking up the hyper focal distance is probably a good starting place.
 
nickjohnwatson said:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the screen shot but I can't seem to find it on my pictures. I have the option to share my pics but all that comes up when I click on the button are icons for sharing to Facebook, Twitter etc. :bonk:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top