Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Nice pics GT. I just picked up the 10-22 EFS from B&H myself about a month ago..might post some pics I got from this weekend tonight.
Overall the picture quality is great on the lense...but I'm not as happy with the build quality as I was hoping. The manual focus ring is dingy and the materials are not all that great. I gues it is pretty close to the 28-135 I have...but then again, that did break after having it 4 years (still haven't sent it in for servicing). I'm also comparing it to the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 I have, so that might be why I am being picky.
As for picture quality...I'm very happy with the lense.
Were you using a polarizer in that first shot?
The build qualiy is fine to me, then again, I don't own an "L" lens...yet.
Yes, I used a 7mm Hoya Circular Polarizer for all the (Utah) shots.
I wasn't saying it was bad...I was just expecting more...especially on the focus ring. I had read some reviews where people had described it as an "L" in disguise...so that is possibly why I got my hopes up.
Have you purchased the hood for it yet? If so, did the hood make it difficult to use the polarizer?
The hood is on the way, so I haven't used a hood and filter in combination.
What about the image quality? They say that is near "L" quality.
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: Mark R
Looks nice - but it's not a particularly flattering lens for portraits.
I'm tempted to get a 10-22 for my 350D, but I'm also considering a 70-200 2.8 - and can't afford both.
You say you used a 7mm polarizer filter - how does that work? Does it go on the rear element, or something?
Whoops, I meant 77mm
I've closely looked at the 70-200 as well, but it's simply too big and heavy for me to take with me all the time. My lenses/lens bag have to be extremely portable. I also don't do much tripod work.
The 10-22 is not a portrait lens. I use my Tamron 28-75 F2.8 for that.
My current lens plans:
Canon EFS 10-22 (A Keeper!)
Canon EFS 17-85 (For Sale)
Tamron 28-75 F2.8 (Sending to Tamron for calibration. Despite being a little soft at F2.8, it's a great lens for the money.)
Sigma 30mm F1.4 (To be purchased following the sale of my 17-85.)
Canon EF 24-105 F4 L (To be purchased within the next 6 months or so.)
I'm also looking forward to the 24-105, but I'm going to wait for final reviews/samples before I get my hopes up too much...it will not be a cheap for an f4 lense...but it will be pretty much the perfect walk around lense if it is anywhere near as sharp as the 70-200 f4 at f4.
I haven't seen enough on the Sigma 30mm F1.4, but I'm definitely interested in it as well. I've been pretty impressed with several of Sigma's EX line of lenses in the last few years.
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Some people over at DPreview got pre-production copies of the 24-105 by mistake. Reports say that the lens is as sharp as the 24-70 at certain focal lengths but not all. The 24-105 is over course longer on the tele end and a lighter lens.
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: PricklyPete
Nice pics GT. I just picked up the 10-22 EFS from B&H myself about a month ago..might post some pics I got from this weekend tonight.
Overall the picture quality is great on the lense...but I'm not as happy with the build quality as I was hoping. The manual focus ring is dingy and the materials are not all that great. I gues it is pretty close to the 28-135 I have...but then again, that did break after having it 4 years (still haven't sent it in for servicing). I'm also comparing it to the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 I have, so that might be why I am being picky.
As for picture quality...I'm very happy with the lense.
Were you using a polarizer in that first shot?
The build qualiy is fine to me, then again, I don't own an "L" lens...yet.
Yes, I used a 7mm Hoya Circular Polarizer for all the (Utah) shots.
I wasn't saying it was bad...I was just expecting more...especially on the focus ring. I had read some reviews where people had described it as an "L" in disguise...so that is possibly why I got my hopes up.
Have you purchased the hood for it yet? If so, did the hood make it difficult to use the polarizer?
The hood is on the way, so I haven't used a hood and filter in combination.
What about the image quality? They say that is near "L" quality.
Oh yeah...I do think the image quality is great...I guess I just misinterpreted the statement. I'm still VERY happy with the purchase as I enjoy the quality of the pictures coming out...which is all that really matters.
Yeah, B&H was out of the hood when I got mine...and I haven't had to get anything else in the last month, so I haven't pick one up.
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
As of last week, B&H has had the hood in stock. Bought mine last Wednesday or so.
Originally posted by: kuk
Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Originally posted by: dartworth
Is the EF-S lens a true 10-22mm on a XT or 16-35mm?
It's EF-S, so it's designed for APS-C sensors like those found on the 300D/350D/20D. So the 1.6x multiplier applies.
But the perspective is still of a 10mm lens, which is dramatic.
Have you tried some 360° panoramas? With this lens, it wouldn't that many shots.
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
did you use any filters on the glass?
very nice btw!
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
nice, I'm planning to buy a tokina 12-24mm but now dell has a 17-85 IS USM for 420 + tax... can't decide. it seems that the 17-85 is more versatile..
Originally posted by: DBL
Originally posted by: alphatarget1
nice, I'm planning to buy a tokina 12-24mm but now dell has a 17-85 IS USM for 420 + tax... can't decide. it seems that the 17-85 is more versatile..
You need a walk-around lens and the 17-85 is perfect. You will not be happy with a 12-24 as a general lens. It would make a nice addition to the 17-85 as would the 10-22.