15-85 or 10-22

1Tanker wrote in post #16731397
I see this written often.

I'm glad to "settle" for 85/5.6, to have 15mm (just as i'm sure you're glad to settle for 16/5.6, for 8mm).

Exactly! But not... The 24-70 gives me the 15 mm FOV the crop sees at f2.8

For me it was indeed the short FL otherwise I'd buy the Tokina for the constant f2.8. No problem upping the ISO for the 8-16.

HOWEVER... I would have a problem with the 5.6 at the 85 portrait length. Narrow DOF. The 5.6 at the end of the 18-200 got me started with the L lenses. I wanted the subject separation... In the short end, who cares. If I really get into astrophotography, then I might swap for the Tokina...

I have the Canon 10-22mm and I had the 17-55mm 2.8 IS
I used both on my trip to Kyoto last summmer. The distortion is minumal and easily corrected in Lightroom, don't worry about that.
I found myself using the 10-22m from morning until about 5pm, and after that, I would swap to the 17.55mm
Dont worry about covering the ranges with your zoom lenses, I hade everything from 10mm to 250mm covered, but that only taught me that I dont shoot above 100mm very often.
It sounds like you have two different needs and I would recpmend two different lenses.
1 If you're seeking a wide angle lens, get the 10-22mm. You will not be disappointed.
Just make sure your camera is level when taking a shot. It shows more perspective distortion when tilts up at a building or how toward the ground.
2 If you are seeking a replacement for your lens kit, then get the 17-55mm 2.8 IS
It is a great lens and works much better in low light than your kit lens.
Also not having a noisy rotation front element is a bonus as well.
Good luck, happy shooting.

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16732042
I have the Canon 10-22mm and I had the 17-55mm 2.8 IS
I used both on my trip to Kyoto last summmer. The distortion is minumal and easily corrected in Lightroom, don't worry about that.
I found myself using the 10-22m from morning until about 5pm, and after that, I would swap to the 17.55mm
Dont worry about covering the ranges with your zoom lenses, I hade everything from 10mm to 250mm covered, but that only taught me that I dont shoot above 100mm very often.
It sounds like you have two different needs and I would recpmend two different lenses.
1 If you're seeking a wide angle lens, get the 10-22mm. You will not be disappointed.
Just make sure your camera is level when taking a shot. It shows more perspective distortion when tilts up at a building or how toward the ground.
2 If you are seeking a replacement for your lens kit, then get the 17-55mm 2.8 IS
It is a great lens and works much better in low light than your kit lens.
Also not having a noisy rotation front element is a bonus as well.
Good luck, happy shooting.

+1

The EF-S 17-55 has by all accounts an IQ similar to an L lens and the constant f2.8

The EF-S 10-22 is probably the happy medium for UWA zooms (it takes filters, is flare resistant and reasonably fast).

The Tokina 11-16 is a constant f2.8 but it is prone to flare by most accounts.

The Sigma 8-16 is the only 8 mm but the filter setup that can accommodate that front bulb costs about 2/3 as much as the lens!

I have long ago decided against the 17-55. While 15mm is probably wide enough to not need a UWA, 17mm is not. The 15-85 is only 1/2 to one stop slower throughout the range of the 17-55 and has a 4 stop IS. The 15-85 is reputed to be pretty much the 17-55's optical equal.

Since I have the 28-135, I only use the kit lens when I need to go wider so the question is is the 15-85 enough of an improvement over the 28-135 to justify their very similar use (less the wide end) or do go really wide with the 10-22 and continue to live with the 28-135.

In any case the kit lens will be relegated to back-up duty. Whichever one I buy, the kit lens will no longer be needed.

Another thing to consider is filters. If you already have a collection of filters (or even just 1 expensive one) for your 28-135, the 15-85 has the same 72mm threads... whereas the 10-22 has 77mm threads.

1Tanker wrote in post #16732429
Another thing to consider is filters. If you already have a collection of filters (or even just 1 expensive one) for your 28-135, the 15-85 has the same 72mm threads... whereas the 10-22 has 77mm threads.

Already done. I use a CPL, ND3, and ND8. All are 77mm and I use stepping rings for smaller lenses. It's a simple system and all fits in one small pouch that hangs on my belt.

Although it has been a few days now, my thanks to everyone who so kindly commented on this thread. I did not expect the amount of discussion you provided and you all did a remarkable job of not straying too far afield. Thanks so much.

Since posting this question, I have begun plans to do a good deal more real estate photography than I had expected. So my choice has become obvious and I will be getting the 10-22. I'll live with the 28-135 a while longer but retire (thankfully) the kit lens. Wide has become more important than a one lens solution. It's nice when work makes a decision for you!

rgs wrote in post #16732327
I have long ago decided against the 17-55. While 15mm is probably wide enough to not need a UWA, 17mm is not. The 15-85 is only 1/2 to one stop slower throughout the range of the 17-55 and has a 4 stop IS. The 15-85 is reputed to be pretty much the 17-55's optical equal.

Actually the 15-85 is 1 and 2/3 of a stop slower (f/5.0 vs f/2.8) than the 17-55 from 38mm to 55mm. The difference for me was the much shallower depth of field of the 17-55 for close subjects. I had a 15-85 as my first upgrade from the kit lens, and loved the results. But once I got the 17-55 I never went back. And it pairs really well with the 10-22 (and a 70-200).

The 15-85 and the 17-55 both have lots of fans. The only f/2.8 lens I have is my 100L macro and I do like the separation I get when using it, however, I mostly use my 15-85 outside in bright Florida sunshine for landscapes, etc.

We are getting a new kitten who will be home in 8 weeks or so. That might change my opinion as I try to do more indoor shots of him. I have learned how to use a flash fairly effectively and I suspect this might be even more important than the f/2.8 but who knows?

rgs wrote in post #16751478
Although it has been a few days now, my thanks to everyone who so kindly commented on this thread. I did not expect the amount of discussion you provided and you all did a remarkable job of not straying too far afield. Thanks so much.

Since posting this question, I have begun plans to do a good deal more real estate photography than I had expected. So my choice has become obvious and I will be getting the 10-22. I'll live with the 28-135 a while longer but retire (thankfully) the kit lens. Wide has become more important than a one lens solution. It's nice when work makes a decision for you!

Glad it worked out. As others have said, its quite a lens. My favorite part of this lens is you can pop off the rear baffle and with a little care, it can be used as a really good rectilinear wide angle on FF and 1.3 crops.

Phoenixkh wrote in post #16752605
We are getting a new kitten who will be home in 8 weeks or so. That might change my opinion as I try to do more indoor shots of him. I have learned how to use a flash fairly effectively and I suspect this might be even more important than the f/2.8 but who knows?

The flash should give the required light but you won't get the separation from close backgrounds. Unless you have an extremely tidy house, a wider aperture prime would be better.

Can't speak to the 10-22 but my 15-85 lived on my crop cameras. Rarely took it off unless I need the range which I rarely did. Fast AF for birds in flight. Good sharp images.

I loved the 10-22mm and used it quote frequently on my T4i.
I also enjoy using it at 22mm quote a lot as a 35mm FOV.
Sadly I cannot mount it on my 6D now, and it is for sale.
It has wonderful bright colors in sunny weather, even compared to an L.
I tested it directly against my 24L II when I bought the 24L.
While it does not have as wide of a length range, it is very lightweight and does not extend when zooming or focusing.