Reviews for EF-S 17-85 and EF-S 10-22, anybody?

Hi,

has anybody so far found reviews for the two new EF-S lenses?

I found the following on a German forum ( www.digitalkamera.de ):

MTF charts for the Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 and the EF-S 17-85/f-5.6 IS

http://www.canon-sales.co.jp …ory/ef_s10_22_f​35_45.html
http://www.canon-sales.co.jp …gory/ef_s17_85_​f4_56.html

(If your Japanese is not as good ... just scroll down to the charts and hit the '+' button )

I'm not an expert on MTF charts myself, but these two considerations were given by other contributors:
- not as valid as a measure done by an external tester
- similar to the 28-135

Best regards,
Andy

Thanks for the links.
Coincidentally, I too was looking around for reviews on the lenses yesterday, and I was JUST about to post a thread identical to this one. 8)

I'm only interested in the 10-22mm lens. The MTF, if I'm reading correctly, looks pretty darn good.

I used to try pretty hard to match up MTF charts with what i was seeing in my own testing but have pretty much given up these days.

When the MTF of the 18-55 kit lens beats some excellent consumer zooms you know something is wrong....

There is a lengthy thread on 'that other forum' discussing the 17-85 and claiming that it is not as good as the kit lens

http://forums.dpreview​.com …rum=1029&messag​e=10132272

I didn't read all of it, because I find that 'SMS style' discussion quite tiring

Best regards,
Andy

Ron, I thought the same re: the MTF charts. The difference is, the ef-s series charts only include data out to 13mm from center, but the ef series goes out to 20mm from center. Big difference!

Has anyone seen reviews yet?

Have Fun,

nope, haven't seen reviews anywhere, but i have seen 17-85mm EF-S today in my local shop, looks a bit bulky to me, slightly shorter than 24-70mm f2.8, unfortunately i didn't get a chance feel it, as it was only for display

Michael Reichman has posted a very short followup of his 20D review after a test he had with the camera and the 17-85 lens.

He doesn't comment a lot on the lens (apart from his annoyance that it is not supplied with a lens shade), but he promised to post some lens tests later.

http://luminous-landscape.com …ameras/20d-location.shtml

Best regards,
Andy

Still looking for reviews...

Have Fun,

Some information on the 17-85...

The following test (resolution, CA, distortion with test shots and analyses) looks interesting:

http://www.wlcastleman​.com/equip/reviews/20D​/index.htm

It suggests that the 17-85 IS has noticeably more distortion and CA on the wide end than the 18-55 kit lens.
Resolution on the wide end for both lenses is pretty good (measured above the 17-35 L).

Bottom line ... the 17-85 IS is pretty comparable to the 28-135 IS in optical performance. No big surprise here

Best regards,
Andy

Andy,

Thanks for that link. Canon was obviously trying to make a lens comparable to the 28-135 on a full-frame. I guess they hit the mark!

Have Fun,

In the October issue of the "Le chasseur d'images" there is a test of the 17-85 with the DOX analyser. The results are not very good, the distorsion is quite high, and the vigneting also is important.
The lens all together only got 3 stars, when the 17-40 had 5 stars.

How does the 28-135 IS rate, in their opinion?

Have Fun,

I haven't seen this lens tested, the 28-105 yes, it did 4 starts !
very low distortion and vignetting, very sharp, only the corners full open were not very good.

Which 28-105? There's the f/3.5-4.5 and the f/4-5.6. I can say that the f/3.5-4.5 is a good, particularly considering its price.