A few 10-22 Snaps

[djtowle]

http://homepage.mac.com/djtowle/PhotoAlbum97.html

FWIW Took a few pics with my new 10-22 today. Tthere's one indoor with flash, outdoor with/without fill flash, And a few shot with the sun low on the horizon and compared to the 24mm f1.4 all most unscientific. But I can tell you that the 24mm f1.4 flares BADLY and looses contrast when compared to the new 10-22. Although there are not perfect A-B shots here, trust me the difference is VERY apparent just in the viewfinder at all angles (from 90deg and sun out of frame, through straight into sun) So far (2 days <g>) I think I like this lens. Note: I think the front filter threads are plastic, be carefull not to cross-thread. Also note, standard thickness filters Vignette badly, even crop the corners. I also found that even a multicoated slim UV/Skylight (B+W $$$ filters) adds 15-30% to the flare problem on both lenses.

[davidwegs]

Wow, that sells me.

What do you think of its abilities as far as speed of focus? I love the 16-35/L as it gets there quick. Is this comparable in any way?

TIA :)

[pcasciola]

Nice shots!!! That's more what I was hoping I'd see from the 10-22. Those are about the best shots I've seen so far. I wonder if ultra wide lenses are less prone to lens flaring in general, because the difference from the 24mm L is very apparent.

[roanjohn]

..........any comment about the build??

Ro1

[djtowle]

Auto Focus speed is excellent on 20D even in low light indoors. Right in there with 17-35 2.8L and 24mm f1.4.

Overall Build, It's a bit smaller and lighter then my 17-35f2.8, Overall Quality is good. It feels a little light to those used to L glass, It's just a little longer then the 24 & 35 1.4s but probably 50% lighter. It reminds me overall of the 28-135 IS lens however with internal focus and zoom I have far more confidence in the durability of the new 10-22. For comparison it seems better built then the 50 f1.4 (why Canon designed that lens with external focusing I don't know) but a little lighter duty then the 85 f1.8. All in All upper-prosumer feel to it.

Don't know if ultra wides flare less, but I am thinking of returning the 24mm which has been flare prone, a bit fuzzy in the corners, and doing some weird glowing halo kind of things in some photos, for a 35mm 1.4 which is supposed to be very excellent.

[Olegis]

This sure looks like a sharp lens ! And no signs of CA - excellent ! I wish I could use this lens with my 10D ...

[phili1]

Your lens performed a heck of allot sharper then the one I had. But at 10mm it favors the right side just like mine. good luck with it.

[timmyquest]

Looks fantastic!

i'll never understand why they wouldnt make it a regular EF mount...then again if i still owned my 300D i doubt i'd be bringing that up :lol:

[pcasciola]

Regarding the reduction in lens flare, I just came across this while reading up on the two new EF-S lenses at EOS magazine online:

By optimising lens coatings, Canon's engineers have been effective in suppressing flare and ghosting, which are more prone to occur with digital cameras due to reflection off the image sensor. Coatings reduce reflections off the lens surfaces to deliver crisp, undistorted digital images with natural colour balance.

Here's the article (http://www.eos-magazine.com/News_49_EF-Sdigilenses.html)

[djtowle]

Thanks for the link,That seems to explain my experience; wouldn't have believed the difference unless I saw it. Time for a 24mm f1.4 Mk II, Canon...? <g>

[roanjohn]

It reminds me overall of the 28-135 IS lens however with internal focus and zoom I have far more confidence in the durability of the new 10-22.

YIKES!!! I've seen that lens in person. It just feels plasticy!!!

Ro1