15Bit wrote:
I have the 10-22mm and its an excellent lens. Low on distortions, high on optical quality.
Hi Ian,
Echo above, the 10-22 should be an L lens, but EF-S don\'t get the red ring...the 17-55 f2.8 is much the same, both are simply pro level glass for crop bodies. I don\'t have any new 3rd party lenses, any I might have are from the 70s or 80s and are manual focus. Since around 1998 I\'ve kept to Canon lenses due to their motors, even the low end glass seemed better then 3rd party ones; although some of the newer Sigma\'s as of late are getting good/great reviews, some Tokina\'s also
I seriously thought I\'d be selling this lens after picking up the 17-40 for my EOS3 film bodies; FF is anticipated this year, but I\'ll be keeping it...it\'s that good. And it takes filters without complaint, the Sigma\'s and other UWA that have a bubble for a front element are for me a PITA to use; don\'t even have a fisheye yet...
My best on your decision; btw, 10-22 on a crop body is equivalent to 16-35 on FF...if you need wider, maybe the 8-15L fisheye...I don\'t seem to need wider then 16/17 as I can always stitch and image if needed..
Jerry
15Bit wrote:
I have the 10-22mm and its an excellent lens. Low on distortions, high on optical quality.
Echo above, the 10-22 should be an L lens, but EF-S don\'t get the red ring...the 17-55 f2.8 is much the same, both are simply pro level glass for crop bodies. I don\'t have any new 3rd party lenses, any I might have are from the 70s or 80s and are manual focus. Since around 1998 I\'ve kept to Canon lenses due to their motors, even the low end glass seemed better then 3rd party ones; although some of the newer Sigma\'s as of late are getting good/great reviews, some Tokina\'s also
I seriously thought I\'d be selling this lens after picking up the 17-40 for my EOS3 film bodies; FF is anticipated this year, but I\'ll be keeping it...it\'s that good. And it takes filters without complaint, the Sigma\'s and other UWA that have a bubble for a front element are for me a PITA to use; don\'t even have a fisheye yet...
My best on your decision; btw, 10-22 on a crop body is equivalent to 16-35 on FF...if you need wider, maybe the 8-15L fisheye...I don\'t seem to need wider then 16/17 as I can always stitch and image if needed..
Jerry
15Bit wrote:
I have the 10-22mm and its an excellent lens. Low on distortions, high on optical quality.
Echo above, the 10-22 should be an L lens, but EF-S don\'t get the red ring...the 17-55 f2.8 is much the same, both are simply pro level glass for crop bodies. I don\'t have any new 3rd party lenses, any I might have are from the 70s or 80s and are manual focus. Since around 1998 I\'ve kept to Canon lenses due to their motors, even the low end glass seemed better then 3rd party ones; although some of the newer Sigma\'s as of late are getting good/great reviews, some Tokina\'s also
I seriously thought I\'d be selling this lens after picking up the 17-40 for my EOS3 film bodies; FF is anticipated this year, but I\'ll be keeping it...it\'s that good. And it takes filters without complaint, the Sigma\'s and other UWA that have a bubble for a front element are for me a PITA to use; don\'t even have a fisheye yet...
15Bit wrote:
I have the 10-22mm and its an excellent lens. Low on distortions, high on optical quality.
Echo above, the 10-22 should be an L lens, but EF-S don\'t get the red ring...the 17-55 f2.8 is much the same, both are simply pro level glass for crop bodies. I don\'t have any new 3rd party lenses, any I might have are from the 70s or 80s and are manual focus. Since around 1998 I\'ve kept to Canon lenses due to their motors, even the low end glass seemed better then 3rd party one; although some of the newer Sigma\'s as of late are getting good/great reviews, some Tokina\'s also
I seriously thought I\'d be selling this lens after picking up the 17-40 for my EOS3 film bodies; FF is anticipated this year, but I\'ll be keeping it...it\'s that good. And it takes filters without complaint, the Sigma\'s and other UWA that have a bubble for a front element are for me a PITA to use; don\'t even have a fisheye yet...
My best on your decision,
Jerry
May 06, 2013 at 01:39 PM
Previous versions of StillFingerz's message #11534342 « Crop wide, canon or sigma ? »
