Convince me to get the EFS 10 - 22

OpenC wrote in post #2159211
The EF-S 10-22 is a thing of great beauty. The only problem I have with mine is that I tend to walk forwards while looking through it, and more than once I've come dangerously close to falling off harbour walls/cliff edges as a result of its unbelievable ability to make things which are 10cm away look like they're 2m away.

It's a fine, fine lens and it's taken more than one of the recent pictures in my gallery below, should you care to look (that said, all the ones that have made it into my gallery have been fairly heavily processed and cropped so you won't be able to make out the IQ of the originals; you'll just have to take my word for it that it's outstanding).

You don't want to do that! - Mind you, you'd also be able to do that with the Sigma

I must echo what others have said about the IQ and colors. The fact is that this lens does things not possible with my other lense such as, controlled perspective distortion, everything in focus near to far. Indoor shots in tight spaces. I paid the extra money for resistance to flare, and lack of pronounced barrel or pincushion distortion. I have never looked back. Great lens!

This was taken next lane over.. really close but the wide angle takes care of that..

i'm looking into getting this lens as well.

I know you said you want convincing on the Canon, but honestly, I don't feel the price premium is worth it. The Tokina 12-24 is just as sharp, with just as good or better color and contrast, and it's built like an L, unlike the Canon. The Sigma 10-20 is as wide as the Canon, still better built, and just as sharp.

Don't be fooled...there are not so good copies of the Canon (in my tests, the Canon finished LAST to the Tokina and Sigma I tried in sharpness).

The Canon is an excellent lens, but in my opinion, is not worth the several hundred dollar premium over the Tokina or Sigma. I have used all 3, and I liked the Canon the least, with the Tokina and Sigma a virtual tie. I went with the Tokina and have absolutely no regrets.

Since you're asking for images, here are two from the Tokina (at both ends of the range).

12mm (see this image to realize that 12mm is wide enough for nearly every application, as I was only 30 feet from the entrance of the Hancock building...and it's 1100 feet tall...I use the 20-24mm range more than I wish for 10mm):

I got the lens from Kea Photographic in HK (via Ebay). Delivery time to Ireland: 3 days. Paid €600 for it (bargain). No customs duties either. Sweet.

The lens? Superb. The extreme wide angle of view opens up a whole new world of photography. Fantastic creative opportunities. There is one serious problem with it though: as it's likely to remain a semi-permanent fixture on my camera my other lenses aren't going to get much use.

Go for it. Yeah, you can save a few bucks by going for the Sigma but it isn't the same, is it?
You owe it to yourself to go for the Canon!

Attached is an example of one of my shots with it - pretty much full frame. (It got Photograph Of The Week on the Shuttercity website).

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

If I still shot on a 1.6 format camera, this lens would be an absolute must for me. The only lens I would rather have would be the 15-150mm f/2.0L IS.

I dont use this lens as much as I would like but its a keeper..

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Out of all my gear, my 10-22 is one of my most capable and favorite lenses to use. When I have a chance to use it, i can turn regular shots into amazing ones.

IQ, weight, and overall quality i was happy with.

Nowadays the 10-22 is my preferred walk-around lens. Although resolution is good, the main reason I bought it is because I needed the range and at that time the 12-24 Sigma was the only competitor.
Although a sunshade isn't really necessary for this lens (quite flare-prone) I'm definately going to buy one, merely for protection.

The fun thing about ultrawides is that you focus somewhere by guessing, and then just shoot without using the viewfinder. I use this technique a few years now, it works great and gives you unexpected views of the world.

Pictures shown here within this thread don't show the real power of an ultrawide IMHO. Check out my weblog:
www.fotodavid.nl/weblo​g

Pictures made with the 10-22 are:
21 oktober (10mm)
16 oktober (yes really...)
28 september. At the dentist. First 3 where shot by my self. The last two by the assistent who found it to be quite funny that I wanted pictures of this ehm "procedure".
20 september. Really showing the power of ultrawide
16 september, top one @16mm, bottom ne @ 10 (INVALID EMAIL)mm
23 augustus
13 augustus, all four
11 augustus, top one. Rainbow fits easilly @ 10mm!
13 februari. Also showing the real power of ultrawide
12 februari

For some other 10-22 shots not on the main page, see "Categorien" (left column) and select the appropriate quarter of the year:
25 september 2005
15 oktober 2005, the pano one.
4 mei 2005
> ...and especially check out the pictures of "17 januari 2005", shot on a FF-body at 20 mm.

Ultrawide is really cool. Buy the 10-22, you won't regret it but you'll have to learn how to use this baby to get the max out of it.

David

-----
Gearlist: Agfa Clack and a 10-22