Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 06 Jul 2010 (Tuesday) 19:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF-S 10-22mm + EF 17-40mm f4.0L

 
r34p3rex
Member
192 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: New York/Boston
     
Jul 06, 2010 19:37 |  #1

What's your opinion on the EF-S 10-22mm combo'ed with the 17-40mm L? I got a T2i several months ago and have used the living daylights out of the kit lens + 55-250 while in China for vacation. These lenses aren't fun anymore :(

Though, I am also considering going for a 17-55mm for now and stepping up (?) to the aforementioned lens combo later on. Thoughts? :)


Gripped 5DII | 24-105 f/4L | 70-200 f/2.8L | Sigma 180mm f/3.5 Macro | 430EX II
AB800 | YN-602RF | Vagabond Mini
My Feedback (on other sites): Overclock.net (external link) | Pbnation (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jsboutin
Member
181 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Jul 06, 2010 19:38 |  #2

I'd get a 24-105 instead of the 17-40, in this situation.


EOS Digital Rebel XT, EF 17-40 F/4 L and 70-200 f/4 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
r34p3rex
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
192 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: New York/Boston
     
Jul 06, 2010 19:45 |  #3

jsboutin wrote in post #10489230 (external link)
I'd get a 24-105 instead of the 17-40, in this situation.

What are the benefits of this lens? :P I figured the 17-40mm, with the 1.6x crop on my T2i, would cover the 27-64mm range, which only leaves a 5mm gap between the 10-22 and the 17-40 combo.

Still trying to learn so forgive me for asking the noob questions :D


Gripped 5DII | 24-105 f/4L | 70-200 f/2.8L | Sigma 180mm f/3.5 Macro | 430EX II
AB800 | YN-602RF | Vagabond Mini
My Feedback (on other sites): Overclock.net (external link) | Pbnation (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
crn3371
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,198 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2005
Location: SoCal, USA
     
Jul 06, 2010 20:14 |  #4

The 1.6 crop doesn't change the focal length of your lenses. With the 10-22 and the 17-40 you would have 2 lenses covering 10mm to 40mm with a 5mm overlap. If you want the ultrawide 10-22 get something longer to complement it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stone ­ 13
Goldmember
Avatar
1,690 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Huntersville, NC
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:01 |  #5

that's ~$1400 for 10-40mm not sure I would consider that a good deal.


Ken
Fujifilm X100T | 5D III gripped |35L | 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 85 1.8 | 430 EX II | Yongnuo YN-568EX | Billingham 445 | Think Tank UD 60 |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jsboutin
Member
181 posts
Joined Mar 2008
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:11 |  #6

r34p3rex wrote in post #10489264 (external link)
What are the benefits of this lens? :P I figured the 17-40mm, with the 1.6x crop on my T2i, would cover the 27-64mm range, which only leaves a 5mm gap between the 10-22 and the 17-40 combo.

Still trying to learn so forgive me for asking the noob questions :D

Well, it's also 10*1.6-22*1.6 FF equivalent, so there's in fact an overlap equivalent to 8mm on FF.

he benifits? IS, 65 extra mm, no overlap, and just a 2mm gap.


EOS Digital Rebel XT, EF 17-40 F/4 L and 70-200 f/4 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
windpig
Chopped liver
Avatar
15,358 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1681
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Just South of Ballard
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:17 |  #7

jsboutin wrote in post #10489230 (external link)
I'd get a 24-105 instead of the 17-40, in this situation.

Yup. More $, but more reach and IS.


Would you like to buy a vowel?
Go ahead, spin the wheel.
flickr (external link)
I'm accross the canal just south of Ballard, the town Seattle usurped in 1907.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zeth-v
Mostly Lurking
15 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:35 |  #8

Maybe consider the 17-55 f2.8 IS more. With that lens you got the semi wide, fast and IS all covered. Then if you find the need for more reach the 70-200 f4L is very affordable and great IQ, just don't expect to use it to stop action indoors.


7D, 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 50mm 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SiaoP
Goldmember
Avatar
1,406 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:39 |  #9

They're too close. Get a 24-70 or 24-105 instead.


My Flickr (external link) | Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jardiniboy
Senior Member
508 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Waipahu, Hawaii
     
Jul 06, 2010 21:55 |  #10

I would say the Tokina 11-16 and 17-55 IS. Zero overlap and you have 2 fast lens.


Gear List Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
in2fx
Member
Avatar
63 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Jul 07, 2010 02:28 |  #11

I love my EF-S 18-200mm IS which lives on my 550D most of the time when I am not wanting to carry any other lenses. I took that set up on an overseas trip resently and as well as spending most of a day around the rocky coastline and in the bush taking photos and then another day at an airshow capturing everything on the ground as well as in the air, I did not feel that I was missing out anywhere.
It's not a fast lens, but it is very versitile :)


Steve
Equipment: Canon DSLRs with a few lenses and a heap of enthusiasm.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jericobot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,128 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: preppingforthetrumpets
     
Jul 07, 2010 02:30 |  #12

Those lenses overlap width and may become redundant, get the 17-40 and be happy


α7ii + (batis 25 f2 / zeiss 55 f1,8 / macro 90 f2,8)
♥ ♦ ♣ ♠

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mj_photo
Member
233 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Jul 07, 2010 06:29 |  #13

10-22mm + 24-105L is the right combination. 17-40L doesn't have IS and it have too much overlap with 10-22mm (you will change lenses a lot in that case).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 07, 2010 07:10 |  #14

Actually, I find that with a decent overlap, you change lenses, less, not more often. At least not at critical times, when changing a lens may mean missing a shot.

With that said, on a crop sensor I wouldn't have that 2 lens combination. 10-22 and one of the 2n-7n's, Canon or Tamron or maybe then 24-105 if f2.8 is not important.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark-B
Goldmember
Avatar
2,248 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Louisiana
     
Jul 07, 2010 13:34 |  #15

r34p3rex wrote in post #10489223 (external link)
What's your opinion on the EF-S 10-22mm combo'ed with the 17-40mm L?

Though, I am also considering going for a 17-55mm for now and stepping up (?) to the aforementioned lens combo later on. Thoughts? :)

For $1450, you can get the Canon 10-22 + Canon 17-40
For $1540, you can get the Sigma 10-20 + Canon 17-55

Second choice is a better option. The Canon 10-22 is 1/2 stop faster at the wide end and 1 stop faster at the long end compared to the Sigma, but I can't think of any other advantages. The long end won't matter anyway if you have the 17-55, because that's the one you will be using from 17mm and longer.

I think the focal range combination is fine regardless of the specific lenses you choose. Most people want the UWA lens to use at the wide end and they rarely get moved from that setting. If there were a reasonably priced 10mm non-fisheye prime, it would probably hurt the sales of the UWA zoom lenses.


Mark-B
msbphoto.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,442 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF-S 10-22mm + EF 17-40mm f4.0L
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

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!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is m.nobles
847 guests, 186 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.