paulhillion Goldmember  1,392 posts Joined Jun 2004 Location: Guernsey, UK More info | Oct 30, 2004 05:30 | #1 Most of the time the Tamron 28-75 is on my camera & the 17-40L is only being put on for the occaisional landscape. I was pondering on whether to sell my 17-40 & replace it with this new 10-22? However I've not been able to find any reviews or user feedback on how this new lens performs. It would be nice to have that extra width & so I'm kinda hoping it gets good reviews!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
izzypizzy Member 227 posts Likes: 2 Joined Sep 2004 Location: L.A, California More info | Oct 30, 2004 05:52 | #2 logical thought, if it's got the image quality, I would do it
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Persian-Rice Goldmember 1,531 posts Likes: 14 Joined Apr 2004 Location: Behind a viewfinder. More info | Oct 30, 2004 15:36 | #3 Many are pretty cautious with this lens, or all new "expensive" non L glass.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 30, 2004 23:23 | #4 I was just speaking with a Canon Rep today at a photo show and I asked him about the 10mm-22mm lense, he said that it was the sharper of the 2 new lenses released (the other being the 17mm-85mm IS) by a large margin. He also said that he had spoken to one of the Canon engineers about the 10mm-22mm and he had said that the picture quality was L quality but the build was pro-sumer quality, he had also said that the lense was supposedly designed as an L lense but at the last minute they changed the plan and kept the glass but ditched the robust build and the weather sealing. I do not know how much of this is accurate but it makes sense, if they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot. Canon 1DsMk2, EOS RP, Canon 17-40 f4L, 24-105 f4.0L ll, Canon 70-300 f5.6L IS , Sigma 85mm f1.4
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Cadwell Cream of the Crop  7,333 posts Likes: 2 Joined Jan 2004 Location: Hampshire, UK More info | Oct 31, 2004 00:10 | #5 jimlp wrote: I was just speaking with a Canon Rep today at a photo show mmm.... but he's not exactly gonna say "it's junk, avoid it like the plague" now is he? It may be all he says it is but I'll join Persian-Rice in recommending a "wait and see" approach. Glenn
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Olegis Goldmember  2,073 posts Likes: 2 Joined Apr 2004 Location: Israel More info | Oct 31, 2004 00:34 | #6 Persian-Rice wrote: wait until 3-4 unbiased reviews come out before doing anything. Ditto. Best wishes,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
MarkH Senior Member  431 posts Joined Jun 2003 Location: New Zealand More info | Oct 31, 2004 01:21 | #7 jimlp wrote: If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot. I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist? Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
chops Senior Member  327 posts Joined Oct 2004 Location: Lakeland, FL More info | Oct 31, 2004 05:13 | #8 MarkH wrote: jimlp wrote: If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot. I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist? Me too! The only L lens I know of that gets near that wide is the 14mm prime. Canon 10D w/ BG-ED3 Grip
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 31, 2004 08:01 | #9 chops wrote: MarkH wrote: jimlp wrote: If they made it an L lense they would be competing against themselves for the most part as L lenses in that range already exist that can be swapped between bodies in contrast to the S mount which cannot. I'm curious, what L lenses in that range already exist? Me too! The only L lens I know of that gets near that wide is the 14mm prime. I was referring to the fact that they would be coming out with a professional lense in a mount that cannot be used on a professional camera 1D Mark2/1D/1Ds Mark2. As far as the range goes you guys are correct, I got my calculations on the crop factor messed up by to much booze. No more 2am posting for me! Canon 1DsMk2, EOS RP, Canon 17-40 f4L, 24-105 f4.0L ll, Canon 70-300 f5.6L IS , Sigma 85mm f1.4
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 31, 2004 09:01 | #10 |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000)  More info | Oct 31, 2004 10:21 | #11 The statement that the 10-22 is "L" glass in a consumer body actually looks pretty accurate on paper. GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aylwin Senior Member  564 posts Joined Aug 2003 Location: Tampere, Finland More info | Oct 31, 2004 23:52 | #12 paulhillion wrote: I was thinking I might just buy it, try the 2 lenses side by side & return if nessesary. Please report back after you do. I'm also considering swapping my 17-40 for the 10-22. Aylwin
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2495 guests, 103 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
