Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLRs by Canon
|
List Price: Our Price: $789.00 You Save: $611.00 (44%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $695.00 (click here) Category: Digital Camera See more digital camera details and other models |
|---|
Digital camera reviews of Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLRs
Digital camera Review: An excellent but expensive ultrawide zoom
Summary: 5 Stars
(4.5 of 5 stars)
This was my third lens purchase, after getting the kit lens with my Rebel XS and the 50mm f/1.8. Why did I choose this lens? Well for one, I was suffering from cheap lens syndrome. While I enjoyed the results I was getting from my other lenses, they weren't much fun to work with because of the cheap build quality. More importantly perhaps, I was finding myself at 18mm on my kit lens more than 50% of the time. While I was generally happy with those results, I was disappointed by the barrel distortion, CAs and flare, and wanted something wider that would give me more flexibility.
I read many reviews of the 10-22mm, as well as the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and 11-16mm f/2.8. All were received pretty positively. I didn't consider Sigma or Tamron options because of apparent quality control issues. So why did I pick this one?
1) Focal length/zoom range: As far as focal lengths were concerned, I wanted something that would give me a fair amount of flexibility, since I'm not too keen on switching lenses frequently. At the wide end, it really does help to have a zoom. The 10mm (16mm equiv) setting is pretty extreme and can be useful, but often the intermediate focal lengths (12-17mm) are more appropriate. Furthermore, at 22mm the resulting perspective could be described as "wide-normal" - things still appear pretty natural. Therefore, you get a lens that dabbles with extreme perspective on the wide end while offering a fairly normal perspective on the long end.
Those who are buying the lens purely for the widest setting may be more attracted to the Tokina 11-16, as it gives you nearly an extra stop in maximum aperture and is apparently a bit sharper than the Canon.
2) Distortion: Some have commented that they don't use the 10-16mm range as much because of distortion. I imagine these are the same people who are using the lens as a substitute for backing up. In fact, the Canon offers the lowest amount of optical (barrel) distortion in its class - much smaller than most standard zooms at their widest setting. It is trivial to correct in post-processing. Therefore, I can only assume that the complaints are about the perspective distortion, which is the result of using the ultra-wide focal lengths. This is the whole point of an ultrawide lens!! If you don't want perspective distortion, back up and zoom in! Or if you're looking for parallel lines buy a full frame camera and the $2500 tilt-shift 17mm lens. Problem solved.
3) Handling of flare: This is the single characteristic of this lens that I appreciate the most. Based on samples I've seen of the Tokinas and other 3rd party lenses, the Canon is the hands down winner on managing flare. With this lens it is possible to have the sun directly inside or just outside the frame with very little consequence to the final image. Even when you do manage to get flare in the frame, it is fairly minimal and not very unsightly. This is a very desireable characteristic of an ultrawide lens, since lots of light sources will find their way into your huge field of view. I find myself shooting into the sun even more than I normally would because of it. Another benefit of this characteristic is that there is little incentive to buy or use the bulky lens hood.
4) Chromatic Aberrations: Compared to the Tokinas, this lens has minimal CAs at the wide end that many will be able to live with in their JPEGs. If you want to get rid of them, it is again trivial to do by shooting RAW and post-processing.
5) Light weight: Despite being about the same size, the Canon is lighter compared to the Tokinas (13 oz. vs. 20 oz.). I feel that it is ideally balanced on my small Rebel XS, and therefore appreciate the weight advantage.
6) Colors: Is it just me or does this lens render beautifully saturated colors? Wonderful green trees and gorgeous blue skies.
Complaints:
1) Price: The Canon is significantly more expensive than 3rd party alternatives, which is not unusual. Maybe more annoying, though, is that it is priced similarly to the full-frame equivalent, the 17-40mm L. Basically you're paying the same price for a lens with less glass and poorer build quality (though the build is not bad). As with the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 Canon has put "L" glass in a consumer body and charges "L" prices because there's no in-house competition. On the bright side, compared to the Nikon equivalents (12-24mm and 10-24mm), which are around $900, this is cheap.
I got this lens during rebate season, but I would have hesitated to spend more than $700 on it with the good 3rd party alternatives available.
2) Sharpness: I must have had unreasonably high expectations in terms of sharpness. The lens produces excellent micro-contrast at normal viewing sizes (very good for all but the largest prints). However, looking at the images at full size on your monitor will reveal somewhat inferior pixel level detail. The results do respond pretty well to sharpening, though. Sounds like the Tokina 11-16 might be a little better in terms of pixel-level detail, but I wouldn't expect it to be too noticeable. For the best sharpness across the frame I try to keep the aperture between f/5.6 and f/8, and never smaller than f/11. Larger than f/5.6 the center is fine but the edges degrade. The only serious complaint is the extreme corners, but this is typical in almost all wide-angle lenses. In any case, I am of the opinion that sharpness is an over-emphasized lens characteristic. I will take the contrast, handling of flare, bokeh and low distortion of this lens over greater sharpness any day.
3) Vignetting: This is most noticeable wide open at 10mm, but again is fairly easily corrected. Not a big deal to me.
4) Not really a complaint, but a warning: The lens isn't very compatible with the built-in flash except at the longest focal lengths. A lens shadow appears at shorter focal lengths, and the flash is unevenly distributed anyway so the effect is pretty undesirable. Better keep the kit lens around when you want to use flash.
Overall, I'm very happy with this lens. It has more or less displaced my kit lens, as I use my 50mm f/1.8 for any short tele needs. I should note, however, that dealing with wide focal lengths requires a lot more skill as a photographer in almost every respect: composition, selection of aperture, focusing, and metering. This is not a point-and-shoot lens. It is tempting to use the 10mm setting a lot but you will find with time that it does not suit all subjects equally well - Some of my favorite photos were taken at intermediate focal lengths, where the IQ of the lens really shines.
This is a great photographic tool that will challenge you to be more creative. You will get the best results with this lens when you are thinking outside the box. In fact, some of my favorite photos from this lens are when I use it for close-ups. It's not by any means a macro lens, but the perspective distortion as well as the large apparent depth of field can make for some nice close-up shots with the right background. Regardless of the brand, I whole-heartedly recommend a wide-angle zoom to those who enjoy capturing big scenes or getting close to their subjects. It's challenging to use but fun and rewarding.
Digital camera Review: Awesome Lens
Summary: 5 Stars
Excellent Lens...used it on a 7d before selling it and thus this lens also. Now use a 16-35L on a full frame camera. The 10-22 was a fantastic lens...zero complaints. That said, consider using a thin filter as 10mm on a 1.6 will see a regular size filter...or at least it did on mine. Aside from that I had no issues...great lens, great value for the quality.Digital camera Review: Awesome non-full frame lens.
Summary: 5 Stars
I've had this lens for about a year now and it is one of my favorite's to shoot with. The pictures always surprise me when I get back home after a day out and about. Even with 3.5 as its lowest aperture you can get amazing low light shots without a flash, even hand held. Personally I bought this expecting distortion which is kinda what I wanted but the only times I've really noticed distortion is shooting straight up the side of a skyscraper at 10mm. Almost all distortion goes as soon as your start zooming.
It's also held up really well to my abuse. I've taken it out to the middle of the desert in early spring, a day at the beach where it was so cold my hands cramped up before my camera did and there was lots of swirling dust and being jostled by kids at the California Academy of Sciences. If this wasn't an EF-S I'm sure it'd have a good chance at being considered an L lens. It has definitely been worth the price for me. I'm just sad I won't be able to use it on the 5D Mark II when I get it.
Digital camera Review: Best Wide Angle Lens For the Price
Summary: 5 Stars
Best Wide Angle Lens For the Price! Canon has made a great product and Amazon has the BEST price. I use this lens mostly for Real Estate pictures. It allows me to be in a tight space (like a Condo) and still get the whole room in the picture.[...].Digital camera Review: Best Wide Angle for Canon cropped sensor
Summary: 5 Stars
This lens is a great option for any Canon owner of a 7d and below. The build quality may not be "L" standards, but picture quality is outstanding! I use this lens for large group shots, indoor shooting, street shooting, and anything/everything to create that "WIDE" look. If you are looking for a wide angle for your bag, this is your best option. I owned the Tokina 11-16...this one is superior and has a further reach...the extra money for this Canon 10-22 was worth it.