about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: mpenza  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mpenza to your Buddy List
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

EF10-22
Review Date: Jan 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $700.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light and compact (100g lighter than the not-as-wide Nikon 12-24DX, 300g lighter than the full-frame Sigma 12-24); Relatively inexpensive (it's abt 25% cheaper than the Nikon 12-24DX in my country!); Fast focussing; Sharp; Low distortion
Cons:
Currently only usable on 2 DSLRs, 300D and 20D; Lack of bundled lens hood; Price (could still be cheaper! it's not a L but priced like one); Not mountable on current and future 1 Series DSLR

This is my first truely wide-angle lens on a Canon DSLR and I continue to be amazed by the coverage. My previous "wide" lenses include the EF-S 18-55 and Sigma 18-125.

Physically, the EF-S 10-22 is pretty small and compact (385g). It feels well built despite the light weight. Focussing is very fast and accurate due to the USM motor. The lens surprises me with the sharpness and is capable of resolving fine details on the Canon 20D. It's pretty sharp wide-open too. Distortion is low too (perspective distortion is another matter but is common to any wide angle lens when the lens is tilted). The great optical performance is probably due to the use of three Aspherical lens elements and a Super-UD element (which is similar to the design for Canon's best super wide-angle zoom, the EF17-40F4L). Below's a sample:
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost.php?p=1018728&postcount=75

It's a great buy for Canon 20D and 300D users looking for a super wide-angle and intends to stay on the APS-C format for quite a while. But for those that are thinking of upgrading to a 1 Series DSLR, the EF17-40F4L or EF16-35F2.8L might be a better choice (and sacrificing extreme wide angle for the moment).

Main gripe is that Canon did not bundle the lens hood, EW83-E (which is extremely hard to find). For the price (which is higher than the EF17-40F4L in some countries), it's not acceptable.