10-22mm L lens?

[MoliroMan]

Will Canon ever make a 10-22mm L lens? I will surely buy it?

How does it compare to a 16-35mm L lens?


Dave

[Jesper]

Nobody knows. The current EF-S 10-22 lens seems to be very good. You don't want to buy it just because it doesn't have a red ring and L in the name?

[Tomsk]

It's unlikely that Canon will make L lenses with EF-S mount. They consider the APS-C size sensor (and thus EF-S mount) as a pro-sumer format. The L lenses are their professional range.

[ddelallata]

What I'd love to see is a 10mm EF-S prime for around 300-400 dlls (US).

[ScottE]

I have the 17-40 L and the 10-22. In the range where they overlap I don't think the 17-40 is any better than the 10-22. I wouldn't get hung up on the "L" designation. The photos are all that counts.

Scott

[MrChad]

What I'd love to see is a 10mm EF-S prime for around 300-400 dlls (US).


Ditto!!! f2.8 or better would be fantastic too!

I'm as wide as I need to be on my general lens at 18mm (Sigma 18-125mm DC) but I'd love a prime lens to play around with on the really wide side for APS-C format. I don't even car if it's a Canon, a 3rd party would be fine provided price was acceptable for its quality.

[Dante King]

dont let the non L status of the 10-22 scare you. I just sold mine to afford an image tank for my vacation and I miss it already.

[MoliroMan]

thanks guys for your replies!

I want to get a good wide angle lens for landscape photos. I was reluctant to get the 10-22mm since it is an EF-S lens.

So for exceptional quality landscape shots which lens would u choose?

1. EF-S 10-22mm.
2. EF 17-40 f/4L.
3. EF 16-35 f/2.8L.

I already have an EF 24-70 f/2.8L and EF 100mm f/2.8L macro lens.

Dave

[the.digital.guy]

The Canon 10-22 is of "L" quality build.
Such a sweet lens.I am happier with this lens then my 17-40 L Lens.
But both lenes have their place.

[Radioham]

Hi

I went for the 17-40 and it’s the bee’s knees



I don’t know what happened to the vote on the best lenses that was on this forum the other day,

I did not see the results,

Steve

[jfrancho]

Ditto!!! f2.8 or better would be fantastic too!

I'm as wide as I need to be on my general lens at 18mm (Sigma 18-125mm DC) but I'd love a prime lens to play around with on the really wide side for APS-C format. I don't even car if it's a Canon, a 3rd party would be fine provided price was acceptable for its quality.Not a prime but there is Tamron 11-18: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=363807&is=REG

[ScottE]

So for exceptional quality landscape shots which lens would u choose?
1. EF-S 10-22mm.
2. EF 17-40 f/4L.
3. EF 16-35 f/2.8L.
I already have an EF 24-70 f/2.8L and EF 100mm f/2.8L macro lens.

I would pair the 10-22 with the 24-70 for almost continuous coverage from super wide angle to short telephoto.

As I said, for exceptional quality, I don't find my 17-40 to be any better than my 10-22 and the 10-22 is much more versatile if you need super wide angles. You do have to learn how to compose with a super-wide angle to get effective photos though. If you just shoot straight on it can make everything in the background look small. On the other hand it can give a great perception of depth in a photo with strong fore, middle and back ground elements.

Scott

[JSolie]

dont let the non L status of the 10-22 scare you. I just sold mine to afford an image tank for my vacation and I miss it already.

And I'm enjoying it! :D

I'm not sure that 2.8 would get that much more on this lens, as its for landscape shots (which tend to be outside, anyway). The lens also does a good job of taking "Easter Island" photos of my kids... :rolleyes:

-- John

[Rob612]

Go with the 10-22 and live happy ! I love mine.

[BlueTit]

Dont forget the sigma 12-24 it is cheaper than the 10-22 and not EF-s.

[Skippy29]

One for sale in the marketplace : )