 |
|
|
tkoet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 12, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 1503
|
|
Review Date: Jul 7, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $699.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Really fun to use - great build - flair resistant - low distortion
|
|
Cons:
|
f4.5 on the long end is an issue
|
|
|
This is a wonderful lens and a good value. Distortion is low, but super wide images can be soft (which I expected). My only real frustration is f4.5
|
|
 Jul 7, 2006
|
|
thw2
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 26, 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 2479
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Beautiful colors and contrast, Sharp, Little CA, Excellent anti-flaring properties, Lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
Some copies show one side blur issues.
|
|
|
I sold the Tokina 12-24 for this lens. The lightweight Canon 10-22 easily outperforms the Tokina in different areas: anti-flaring, low CA, sharp, lightweight. Sharper than the Tokina although the latter has good contrast.
If Sigma had produced copies of their 10-20 without the right side blur issue, I would have bought it. I tried several copies of the Sigma and reealize all of them are idiots.
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2006
|
|
MDRUZIAK
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 7, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 24
|
|
Review Date: Jun 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lightweight, enables creativity, just as sharp as my 24-70L
|
|
Cons:
|
Slightly soft wide open at 10mm
|
|
|
This is a great lens that is just as sharp as my 24-70L (which leads me to think that maybe I should send the L back for calibration).
The wide side of the lens really gets the creative juices flowing because it gives you a new view that you can't get with a longer lens.
I find myself doing a lot of experimenting and what if-ing with this lens.
Highly Recommended!
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2006
|
|
junlin18
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 18, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2006
|
|
execom99
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 23, 2005
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 173
|
|
Review Date: Jun 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I found it very useful with 24-105 lens which makes great combo for travelling and general photography. I did one wedding with amazing results with this combo also. 10-22 is very sharp, light, very well build. I think it will reamin in my bag till I will not go to full frame world again :)
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I think best option to view world really wide on Canon 1.6x crop factor DSLRs.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2006
|
|
fotografur
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4042
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Wide angle, small, light, quiet and fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not consistently sharp. Corners soft. Right side blur.
|
|
|
It cost more then the 17-40L. And the L is better built, comes with a pouche and hood and is weather sealed.
This is the third copy I tried. I know it's not my camera or tests. I testing these against my 17-40L. My Tokina is sharper from 12mm -22mm. I really wanted to get a good copy of this then because I need 10mm but no luck. If it was as good as the Tokina at 12mm and on I would of been happy :0(
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2006
|
|
Nick De Marco
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jun 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good quality, very good range.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
I love this lens. I had previosuly bought the Canon EF-S 17-85mm because I wanted a good walkabout lens and one that could produce wideangles. However, planning for a trip where I was going to take landscapes, I relaised I required a 'proper' wide anfle lens for my Canon 350D. So even though I had just broke the bank on various lenses, I splashed out on this.
I was not dissapointed. In terms of quality I think it is one of my best lenses, comparable (though obviously not quite so fast) to my 50mm f1.4. The range is excellent, from super wide to 22 which you can use for many types of photography. I used a x4 HD filter for capturing sunrises, sunsets etc., and the colours produced by this lens were great.
If you want a super wide angle zoom, buy this one.
I have a gallery of photos taken with this lens on my 350D at http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/1022
|
|
|
Jun 13, 2006
|
|
photo1a
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 443
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $680.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, sharp, good color. L quality pics, but not build.
|
|
Cons:
|
None. I'm happy with mine.
|
|
I really like my lens. It is sharp and has good color. Images compare favorably with my 70-200 2.8L and 24-105L. It is possible to get some interesting effects with this lens if you have some object positioned in the near foreground. It's a fun lens to use. It's light and easy to tote around as a second or third lens. A few pics at: http://fenwick.smugmug.com/gallery/1448801/1/72241530
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2006
|
|
Pow Wow
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light-weight, fun to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit expensive.
|
|
|
I enjoy using this lens. It performs well, is easy to use, and light-weight. I am concerned about the high price for an EF-S lens.
I would recommend this to anyone above all the super-wides available on 1.6 crop bodies. It is the best.
|
|
|
Jun 3, 2006
|
|
vachss
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 9, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1381
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $625.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice FOV range. Good center sharpness. Low distortion in mid part of zoom range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Edges not very sharp at wide end.
|
|
|
I've had this lens for almost 1.5 years now and shot with it extensively on a 20D. If you want a superwide Canon lens on a crop body it certainly serves this purpose well enough. That said I have never been impressed with the edge sharpness from 10-12mm. Even at f/8 the edges at the wide end look pretty soft to me. I tried a couple of copies and both were the same in this regard. That said it still is a very effective landscape lens on a 1.6x body and I will keep mine until Canon produces a sharp prime in the 12mm range (i.e. probably until doomsday).
|
|
|
May 25, 2006
|
|
sagai
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 15, 2006
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Wide anglE , good USM, almost perfect DOF
|
|
Cons:
|
not absolutely perfect sharpness, Unsharp mask mostly needed
|
|
Have it by 3 months, I am very happy with it, however the first couple of week spent learning how to use it.
I do suggest when having a new one, be patient and learn and experience how can you get the most out with your camera body, I only found good result in Manual mode, A-DEP forgetable.
for more, u can make your own decision, my last week pictures with this lense are here:
http://kep.tar.hu/sagai/50267157#2
I do suggest to have it.
hi
Szabolcs
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2006
|
|
Russ
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 22, 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Apr 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colour, sharpness, lack of distortion, contrast. Light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom and focus ring reversed from L - takes getting used to. Doesn't feel as good as L.
|
|
|
Took me a long time to decide and when this specimen came up for sale, I grabbed it within 5 minutes of posting and beat the others to it by a few minutes!!
Taken a few test shots and my verdict is that it is almost as good as my 17-40L lens in terms of image quality, still not quite the sharpness as my 50 1.8 MkI and 85 1.8.
I reckon Canon should tag these EF-S "L"s perhaps with a "LS" designation and a green ring or something to differentiate them from the 18-55s of this world.
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2006
|
|
isogood
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Location: France
Posts: 405
|
|
Review Date: Apr 13, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
color rendering, wide angle at 10, good contrast, very little flare, not heavy, good range.
|
|
Cons:
|
a little softness on the edges, but all wide angle zooms have the same or worse.
|
|
I use now this lens since 6 months, always very happy with it, confirm my first rating at 9.
Very good results on crowds, landscapes, or architectural, even in some situations close of the players for golf shots.
often use in a "funny" mode more than a "serious" mode, I think I will complet it with the future 17-55.
you may see a gallery of samples here
http://www.pbase.com/isogood/canon_10_22_at_f10&page=all
and much more on some galleries of my Pbase
http://www.pbase.com/isogood
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2006
|
|
vmar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 9, 2004
Location: Greece
Posts: 19
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $740.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focus, color rendition, contrast, sharpness, size and weight.
Well controlled distortions.
|
|
Cons:
|
Rather expensive, hood not included.
|
|
|
It has served me very well for more than one year. The only real ultra wide angle solution, Canon provides for bodies with 1,6 cropped sensors.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2006
|
|
Rusty1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 799
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $639.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good sharpness, color and contrast, fast and quite focus, light wieght, internal zoom, filter mount does not rotate, CA flare and distortion well controled for this focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
EF-S mount only, exspensive, average consumer grade build, does not come with lens hood
|
|
|
Can't afford to go FF for awhile and this has the wide angle I'm missing.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2006
|
|
ddixon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 27, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focus, ring USM, good build quality, L-like aspherical and super UD elements, true wide angle for 20D, 30D and Rebel owners
|
|
Cons:
|
EF-S so I cant mount it on my girlfriends Elan 7n, but thats minor.
|
|
|
Just added this lens to my kit to fill the gap that my EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 was missing on the 1.6 body. I took it out as soon as I got it because I have read reports of bad copies coming off the production line, and I was not disappointed. Colour, contrast, and sharpness are all excellent on my copy in my crude tests. The only problem I have noticed is when viewing the images at 100%, you get a really noticeable pixelation effect. I have read though thats because imaging sensors have a hard time resolving detail when details get down to the 1-2 pixel range
Focusing is REALLY fast and accurate thanks to ring USM and a short infinity focus point. Distortion is well controlled but is easy to get at 10mm if want it. I have notices a little vignetting at 10mm, but it disappears at longer focal lengths.
Overall this is an awesome lens for a 1.6 body. The build quality may not be L quality, but its a definite step up from my EF 28-105 II, or my EF 100-300, but it better be for costing many times more than either of those lenses. A lot of people make comparisons with the 17-40L or the 16-35L, but when you mount them on a 1.6 body, you get something around 28mm equivalent - not even in the same class. I am not disappointed in the least.
Dave
|
|
|
Apr 3, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
218
|
461777
|
May 27, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
93% of reviewers
|
$686.70
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.50
|
7.60
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
