|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
February 11th 07, 10:00 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all
Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. 
|
|
#2
February 11th 07, 11:18 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
On Feb 11, 5:00 pm, "Annika1980" wrote:
I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL.http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. That is a valuable piece of information Bret, and thank you so much for going through the trouble and testing this lens for us. Yeah, it is a big sigh of relief knowing you got the better of the two lenses. Most of us wouldn't know this unless you did the test for us. And $800. is a lot of dough to fork out! Would you go with the 5D? O the newer 5D which has * 16 MP full frame sensor * ISO 6400, boost-able to 12800 * DIGIC III * More & Improved AF points (Eye controlled AF?) * 5 FPS * Anti-dust * Price: higher than the current 5D And coming soon I hear is the EOS 35D/40D * 12MP * Improved sensor as described above. Not the same as the one in the 400D. * DIGIC III * Still 5 FPS * More AF points and faster and more accurate AF. * Anti-Dust * 1.6X Crop Factor * Price: US$1300 Looking forward to more test results. Helen
|
|
#3
February 11th 07, 11:29 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
"Annika1980" wrote in message oups.com... I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. "If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town" There are a few players in this FL and for me the king is the Sigma 10-20. I found it way sharper than the Canon corner to corner, with less corner distortion and much, much more resistant to flare. It's quite a bit cheaper too! Sadly I no longer have this lens, as my 20D has been religated to backup mode for the 1DS2.... but if the 20D was still my main shooter I would have this lens at the top of my list. A couple of FOV samples... http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...aySunrise4.jpg http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...aySunrise3.jpg and a lens flare test..... http://www.potd.com.au/samples/Sigma10-20_Lab3_WEB.jpg Cheers Rusty http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery
|
|
#4
February 11th 07, 11:36 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
On Feb 11, 6:29 pm, "POTD.com.au" wrote:
"Annika1980" wrote in message oups.com... I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. "If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town" There are a few players in this FL and for me the king is the Sigma 10-20. I found it way sharper than the Canon corner to corner, with less corner distortion and much, much more resistant to flare. It's quite a bit cheaper too! Sadly I no longer have this lens, as my 20D has been religated to backup mode for the 1DS2.... but if the 20D was still my main shooter I would have this lens at the top of my list. A couple of FOV samples... http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris... and a lens flare test..... http://www.potd.com.au/samples/Sigma10-20_Lab3_WEB.jpg Cheers Rustyhttp://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris... Those are nice shots Rusty. I do like the L lenses though. Thanks for sharing. Helen
|
|
#5
February 11th 07, 11:40 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
On Feb 11, 6:36 pm, wrote:
On Feb 11, 6:29 pm, "POTD.com.au" wrote: "Annika1980" wrote in message roups.com... I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. "If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town" There are a few players in this FL and for me the king is the Sigma 10-20. I found it way sharper than the Canon corner to corner, with less corner distortion and much, much more resistant to flare. It's quite a bit cheaper too! Sadly I no longer have this lens, as my 20D has been religated to backup mode for the 1DS2.... but if the 20D was still my main shooter I would have this lens at the top of my list. A couple of FOV samples... http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris...... and a lens flare test..... http://www.potd.com.au/samples/Sigma10-20_Lab3_WEB.jpg Cheers Rustyhttp://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery-Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris...... Those are nice shots Rusty. I do like the L lenses though. Thanks for sharing. Helen- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sorry, I tried to cut and paste your pics on my reply post, but it's not working. But everyone knows what I mean.
|
|
#6
February 12th 07, 12:00 AM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
wrote in message ups.com... On Feb 11, 6:29 pm, "POTD.com.au" wrote: "Annika1980" wrote in message oups.com... I had the opportunity to use this lens this week on my 20D. Like all Canon EF-S lenses it was designed to be used on the Canon cameras with a cropped sensor. With the 20D's 1.6x crop the lens gives a 16mm equivalent FOV. The lens is well built and sturdy without being too heavy. It was nice to finally see a very wide field of view through the 20D viewfinder, but I found myself struggling to find subjects that lend themselves to that wide a FL. http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Normally, I use my 17-40 f/4L for wide angle shots and have rarely found it lacking. I'll go by the aquarium in a day or two and do some more shots with it. Perhaps it would be more suitable in that environment. In my "brick wall" testing I matched the 10-22 against the 17-40L, with both of them set at 20mm focal length. Both lenses worked best around f/8, but the 17-40L was clearly sharper in the head-to-head testing. Now I can breathe a big sigh of relief. I just saved 800 bucks! In summary, there were no surprises with this lens. It did what it is supposed to do and did it well. If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town. It didn't match the overall quality of the 17-40 f/4L, but that was no surprise either. I doubt I would ever use this lens for landscapes, as I could get much better results from panoramic stitching. I could see using it for one of those "stadium shots" where you can see the whole football or baseball field. But otherwise, I'll stick with the 17-40L and wait on that 5D. "If you have a 20D or 30D and need the full coverage this lens gives it's about the only game in town" There are a few players in this FL and for me the king is the Sigma 10-20. I found it way sharper than the Canon corner to corner, with less corner distortion and much, much more resistant to flare. It's quite a bit cheaper too! Sadly I no longer have this lens, as my 20D has been religated to backup mode for the 1DS2.... but if the 20D was still my main shooter I would have this lens at the top of my list. A couple of FOV samples... http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris... and a lens flare test..... http://www.potd.com.au/samples/Sigma10-20_Lab3_WEB.jpg Cheers Rustyhttp://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris... Those are nice shots Rusty. I do like the L lenses though. Thanks for sharing. Helen Yeah I like the L's too (I think the only non-L Canon lens I have is the kit lens that came with the 20D and I think it's still in the box LOL) but this is one case where the L is soundly trounced (IMHO) by a third party manufacturer!
|
|
#8
February 12th 07, 10:27 AM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
On Feb 12, 9:29 am, "POTD.com.au" wrote:
A couple of FOV samples... http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery/a...1/SeawaySunris... and a lens flare test..... http://www.potd.com.au/samples/Sigma10-20_Lab3_WEB.jpg Cheers Rustyhttp://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery Nice work with the seascapes, as always (damn you! (O  , and the flareresult is impressive - I mean it's there, but very unobtrusive and hasn't done much damage to contrast at all. I think Sigma sometimes gets overly criticised - they have made *some* gems, and clearly some of their designers know what they are doing..
|
|
#9
February 12th 07, 08:23 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
"Annika1980" Rattling like a freight train, it's
keyboard spewed out... news:1171231237.530784.224110 @a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com: http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/74259301 Wow... Now that's what I call a really excellent example of a blown away dog. Highlights just don't come into it in sunlight, do they Mr PHOTOGRAPHER? Huge round of appaluse for this magnificient effort. Looks like you washed the poor old thing so many times, you washed out all her details! ROTFL at that one, mate. You really should stop posting pics of your wife in a public forum. This is definitely one for the Bret Douglas Bret Hogan or whatever your name really is, collection. Just for the record inbred... You and I are a long way from finished. From PBase, legal team. --------------------------- "Hello Douglas, Apologies, for the delayed response. The account has been removed. The documentation you requested will be mailed to you." Thanks, ########## PBase Team -- From Douglas...
|
|
#10
February 12th 07, 08:56 PM
posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
|
|||
|
|||
|
CANON EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED !
On Feb 12, 3:23 pm, Douglas MacDonald photosbydouglas-
wrote: Just for the record inbred... You and I are a long way from finished. As predicted, The Black Knight begs for more punishment. You should be careful what you ask for, Assmunch. I'll make ya famous.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 TESTED ! | Annika1980 | Digital Photography | 12 | February 12th 07 06:57 PM |
| Canon 10-22mm or Sigma 10-20mm? | Mark | Digital SLR Cameras | 11 | June 11th 06 05:18 AM |
| Couple more Canon 10-22mm EF-S examples | Frank ess | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | June 13th 05 08:22 AM |
| Canon 10-22mm Lens | Russell | Digital Photography | 23 | April 30th 05 02:22 PM |
| FS:Brand new Canon EFS 10-22mm | Jim Dawson | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 1 | January 23rd 05 04:17 PM |
Linear Mode
