Thinking about selling my 17-40L for the 10-22??

[paulhillion]

Most of the time the Tamron 28-75 is on my camera & the 17-40L is only being put on for the occaisional landscape. I was pondering on whether to sell my 17-40 & replace it with this new 10-22? However I've not been able to find any reviews or user feedback on how this new lens performs. It would be nice to have that extra width & so I'm kinda hoping it gets good reviews!

Your thoughts as always would be most appreciated!

[izzypizzy]

logical thought, if it's got the image quality, I would do it:)

[Persian-Rice]

Many are pretty cautious with this lens, or all new "expensive" non L glass.
Considering this is a substantial sum of money, wait until 3-4 unbiased reviews come out before doing anything.

[jimlp]

I was just speaking with a Canon Rep today at a photo show and I asked him about the 10mm-22mm lense, he said that it was the sharper of the 2 new lenses released (the other being the 17mm-85mm IS) by a large margin. He also said that he had spoken to one of the Canon engineers about the 10mm-22mm and he had said that the picture quality was L quality but the build was pro-sumer quality, he had also said that the lense was supposedly designed as an L lense but at the last minute they changed the plan and kept the glass but ditched the robust build and the weather sealing. I do not know how much of this is accurate but it makes sense, if they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot.

[Cadwell]

I was just speaking with a Canon Rep today at a photo show

mmm.... but he's not exactly gonna say "it's junk, avoid it like the plague" now is he? It may be all he says it is but I'll join Persian-Rice in recommending a "wait and see" approach.

[Olegis]

wait until 3-4 unbiased reviews come out before doing anything.

Ditto.
I would never buy a lens without going through a couple of reviews first, or at least testing it myself in a store (thorough tests are not always possible in a store).

[MarkH]

If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot.

I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist?

[chops]

If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot.

I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist?

Me too! The only L lens I know of that gets near that wide is the 14mm prime.

[jimlp]

If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot.

I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist?

Me too! The only L lens I know of that gets near that wide is the 14mm prime.

I was referring to the fact that they would be coming out with a professional lense in a mount that cannot be used on a professional camera 1D Mark2/1D/1Ds Mark2. As far as the range goes you guys are correct, I got my calculations on the crop factor messed up by to much booze. No more 2am posting for me!

[paulhillion]

Has the 10-22 been released yet? I couldn't find it on the B&H site. I was thinking I might just buy it, try the 2 lenses side by side & return if nessesary.

[CyberDyneSystems]

The statement that the 10-22 is "L" glass in a consumer body actually looks pretty accurate on paper.

If you look at the element layout for wide angle "L" zooms.. the 17-40mmL and 16-35mmL both have an element complimant that includes 3 aspherical elements and a UD lens or two..

This is exactly what the 10-22mm contruction incorporates..

The "non L" 20-35mm (the widest non L zoom canon has) incorporates NO aspherics or UD elements in it's contruction... and the wider EF-S 18-55mm incorporates only a single aspherical element and NO UD glass at all...

Thus.. at least on paper.. the claim that the 10-22 is "L" glass on the inside.. seems to hold up.

[Aylwin]

I was thinking I might just buy it, try the 2 lenses side by side & return if nessesary.

Please report back after you do. I'm also considering swapping my 17-40 for the 10-22.