I'm having trouble deciding, and I have to make a decision within the next week in order to get it in time for my trip. They are about the same price and I just can't choose between nicer glass, and wider angle. Any other thoughts/suggestions? I wish I could afford the 16-35, but that is just not going to happen at this point.
08-18-2005, 11:37 AM
It's my current walk around lens. Quality is excellent and it's the cheapest L out there.
Know a few people with the 10-22 and they love it also. Problem is that it's an EF-S lens, alright if you have an EF-S compatible Canon but sucks if you decide to move up to a full frame, though the 17-40L on a full frame is pretty sweet too.
08-18-2005, 11:52 AM
While it's true that one is an L, I wouldn't necessarily hold that against the 10-22. By all accounts it's a superb lens. I think you really need to decide based on focal length. The 17-40 makes a good all purpose lens on a 1.6x body (if a little limited in reach). The 10-22 is a true wide angle for a 1.6x body. So what sort of shooting do you intend to do, and what do you presently have. Start there, however this decision should be fairly easy since both lenses are good, and both suit different purposes.
08-18-2005, 03:32 PM
Even with a 1.6x increase on my XT, I only occasionally use the 18mm end of my kit lens. Unless you really need the ultra-wide angle, go for range.
08-18-2005, 04:26 PM
08-18-2005, 04:32 PM
which is pretty soft everywhere :)
I'm just saying that the 10-22 is a lens geared towards photographers who need a serious wide angle, and it's sacrificing usability as an everyday lens.
08-18-2005, 05:09 PM
08-18-2005, 08:22 PM
it's pretty useful. i've never understood the apeal of the EF-S lenses, considering that EF-S will be dead in another year or two (5D, etc).
08-18-2005, 08:35 PM
TOo many lenses out there already and will tick off consumers who have bought these. Plus to reduce the cost of these DSLRs so almost anybody can buy these, such as myself, these smaller sensors are here to stay.
The Canon xD lineup will always be full frame and at a much higher price, while the xxD and xxxD lineup will use the smalle sensor. They have already killed off the 1.3x sensor. Next 1D MarkII N will be a full frame sensor, 12.8MP, and do 13fps from what I've read.
08-18-2005, 08:52 PM
not that i don't beleive you, i'm just curious. i'm too busy to look around much for this type of reading material.
08-19-2005, 04:14 AM
But if you don't have time, surf the canon gear forum at fredmiranda. Usually only the better rumors work their way over there.
08-24-2005, 09:49 AM
Like RKA said below, it's just a matter of which focal length range you need. If you need the full 10-40 range, you might want to plan on getting both eventually.
I normally have the 17-40 on my 20D, and that works great for most day to day stuff, but every once in a while I'll have a special need for the 10-22, and I dig it out. I can't really imagine leaving the 10-22 on there as my regular lens, unless the only thing I ever shot was really wide landscapes, or perhaps interior stuff. You just have to be careful of distortion when shooting with the 10-22.
There really isn't that big a quality difference between the two.