Sold 17-40L to get Canon 10-22, my reasons! (sample pics)

[paulhillion]

Having used my 17-40L a great deal last year whilst traveling across the US I found on many occasions wishing I had just a bit more width on landscape shots. When the Canon 10-22mm came out I thought about getting it but never quite plucked up the courage to go through with it. The only way I could get one was to sell my 17-40L and it took until a couple of weeks a go for me to take the plunge. My reasoning being that I'm saving to purchase the 24-70L (I'll sell my Tamron 28-75) and I thought having the 10-22 and the 24-70L would make more sense then keeping the 17-40 to go with the 24-70, less of an overlap and plus that extra width! No doubt once i get it I'll keep the 24-70 on my camera most of the time and switch to the 10-22 for the landscapes.

So I finally got my 20D back from the Canon Service Centre today (another story!!) and so was able to at last try out the 10-22 which had arrived from B&H a couple of weeks back. First impressions are good, it's VERY light and compact and yet still feels sturdy and well built. When I first looked throught the view finder and saw what that extra 7mm makes...WOW! Unfortunately by the time I got the camera set up I only had about half an hour of daylight left so i quickly jumped in the car and found a couple of spots to take a few shots. I'll no doubt post a few more examples in the next week or so.

http://photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/10221.jpg

http://photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/10221a.jpg

http://photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/10222.jpg

http://photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/10223.jpg

[mbze430]

Good choice, now only if they make one with just EF....That would be heaven for me. Plus I can keep my 20D!

[paulhillion]

Good choice, now only if they make one with just EF....That would be heaven for me. Plus I can keep my 20D!

If in the future I'm lucky enough to get say a 1D Mark II I think I'd probably keep my 20D as a 2nd body and no doubt use it with the 10-22 for landscapes, either way I think the 10-22 will pretty much keep it's value if did want to go back to the 17-40 or most likely the 16-35L.

[Tom W]

Well, if you simply want the field of view, the 16-35 or 17-40 will get you on full-frame what the 10-22 gives you on the 1.6. On the other hand, if you want the extra width, the choices are limited to 15mm fisheye and Sigma 12-24, as far as I know.

[mbze430]

Canon has a 14mm L. I have the 15mm Fisheye, but even have de-fishing it with PTLens or Panatools, the edge is has so much CA, it's not useable.

I was going to get the 14mm L, but I think I would rather spend the money on the 1DMKII upgrade over my 20D.

Here is a sample of 15mm defished.

[Ballen Photo]

Paul, I think your logic on buying this lens for less overlap is sound.
I like these shots, too.
-Bruce

[Huckaback Photo]

Hello Paul
Quite nice to see these shots today as were coming over to Guernsey on monday for a few days to catch up with friends and of course take photographs.
Just looked at your images taken in Australia very nice,with wonderful skies.
What's the chance of some wonderful skies in Guernsey this week.
I must say looked promising on your shots above.
info re any events on this week would be appreciated.
were at Focus on Imaging tomorrow, I must resist spending to much.

Cheers
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_photo

[paulhillion]

Hello Paul
Quite nice to see these shots today as were coming over to Guernsey on monday for a few days to catch up with friends and of course take photographs.
Just looked at your images taken in Australia very nice,with wonderful skies.
What's the chance of some wonderful skies in Guernsey this week.
I must say looked promising on your shots above.
info re any events on this week would be appreciated.
were at Focus on Imaging tomorrow, I must resist spending to much.

Cheers
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_photo

Thanks Martin, the weather outlook for next week is quite good with no rain forcast which is always a bonus! I take it you will have visited Guernsey before so I'm sure you'll know of the various beauty spots etc that are great to photograph at any time of the year, if not I'm sure that your friends will point you in the right direction. The BBC wildlife photographer of the year exhibition is on at the moment at the Guernsey Museum, well worth a visit.

If you get chance one evening pop into The Foresters Arms Pub in St. Peter Port, ask for Paul and I'll buy you a pint, we do great bar meals as well :-)

[sparker1]

Paul, thanks for starting this thread and posting your 10-22mm shots. Reason: I just today clicked on "Buy Now" for the 10-22mm, primarily for landscapes as you stated. It will be a new dimension for me, as the widest I've had till now is the 18-55mm kit lens. I'm anxious to get and use my 10-22mm.

[Huckaback Photo]

Paul just checked your images taken in the states.
you have some real nice pictures on there.

Check your mail
Cheers
Martin

http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_photo

[Sydor25]

Paul, how would you compare the 17-40mm and 10-22mm when both are used between 17-22mm? I have the 10-22mm right now and I'm now leaning towards keeping it instead of getting the 17-40mm because the pictures look fantastic when using the 10-22mm between 17-22mm. Since I've never used the 17-40mm, I can't comment on which is better between 17-22mm. I was hoping that you could. :)

Having the ability to use the 10-16mm end of the 10-22mm lens makes it more usefull than the 17-40mm, unless you feel that the 17-40mm lens performs better than the 10-22mm lens at the 17-22mm focal lengths?

[CyberDyneSystems]

IMO, the 10-222 is optically the equal of the 17-40mm..
It is lighter not just from lighter materials, but significantly less glass as it does not need to cover the larger image frame,.

I would be intersted in this lens if I;
A: Needed wider than the 17-40mm
B: Did not need an EF mount.

Great pics by the way, looks like after the wait,.. despite the breif bit of daylight,. UK weather was actually co=operating for a change ;)

[kawter2]

Canon has a 14mm L. I have the 15mm Fisheye, but even have de-fishing it with PTLens or Panatools, the edge is has so much CA, it's not useable.

I was going to get the 14mm L, but I think I would rather spend the money on the 1DMKII upgrade over my 20D.

Here is a sample of 15mm defished.

I have never understod why people"DE-Fish a fisheye" Wehn you get a fishye you are getting a HUGE effect. It is like getting a red gelatin filter and then correcting the tone in PS..

I am dieing for a 10mm fisheye from canon and everyone wants to de fish theirs????? I have tried the15mm fish and it isn't even close on a 1.6..I also have looked at the 8mm's and I can't stand that they don't fill the entire frame. I love the 10-22mm wide angle, but i just want some of that good ole barrel distortion. (ohh I lither N**on for that 10.5mm fish)

[RJSorensen]

Paul . . . you spark my interest in this lens. Your shots are very nice.

[merlyn9]

Paul --

You're making me cry again! I'm not giving up my 10D, can't afford the 1ds MKII...
and Canon hasn't made that lens for me yet..... I fell in love with that lens, only to have my heart ripped violently from my chest...

Your images are great!


---michael

[paulhillion]

Paul, how would you compare the 17-40mm and 10-22mm when both are used between 17-22mm? I have the 10-22mm right now and I'm now leaning towards keeping it instead of getting the 17-40mm because the pictures look fantastic when using the 10-22mm between 17-22mm. Since I've never used the 17-40mm, I can't comment on which is better between 17-22mm. I was hoping that you could.

Because of the weather (lot's of rain :-() I haven't been able to get out and use it since getting my camera back at the weekend. I agree with CDS in that looking at other samples posted on the web that I feel it's at least an equal to the 17-40L. I just couldn't see a point (if you're a 300D or 20D owner) of keeping the 17-40 if like most people you own say a 24-70 or 28-70 because of the overlap from 24/28 to 40mm. My reasoning being that the 24/28-70 would be the ideal walkabout lens and switching to the 10-22 for those landscape shots.

Hopefully the weather will improve soon and I'll be able to get out and play, I'll post some more shots from the 10-22 as soon as I can.

[Andy_T]

IMO, the 10-222 is optically the equal of the 17-40mm..


CDS, I strongly doubt that any 22x hyperzoom could be the optical equal of the 17-40/4.0 L

:wink:

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Those shots from the 10-22 look very good.

Best regards,
Andy

[paulhillion]

Just got back from spending a couple of hours out in the cold and showers trying out my new lens. I have to say viewing the results I'm a very happy chap indeed! Me thinks this lens is going to get a lot of use!!

Here's a few samples from this afternoon...

A last look at the fire before heading out into the cold!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/4.jpg

Is that a seagull flying upside down?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/5.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/7.jpg

Me and my shadow!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/3.jpg

100% Crop from the photo above
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/3a.jpg

[Ballen Photo]

Here's a few samples from this afternoon...



Paul, These all look nice and sharp to me. Congrats on your new lens. :D
-Bruce

[cc10d]

Paul --

You're making me cry again! I'm not giving up my 10D, can't afford the 1ds MKII...
and Canon hasn't made that lens for me yet..... I fell in love with that lens, only to have my heart ripped violently from my chest...

Your images are great!


---michael
20D It has more than meet my needs(previously 10D) That gets yu the 10-22 also.