View Full Version : interested in getting new lens, need advise
24th December 2009, 09:42 AM
Hi Im new this forum. I own a Canon 50D and a EFS 18-200 lens. I have been shooting with this lens, mostly landscapes and wedding photography. Recently the Canon 10-22 have caught my attention and I would like to know:
1) should I still get this lens since I own the 18-200?
2) if so, what can the 10-22 lens do that the 18-200 cannot?
3) does the 10-22's "10" means i can fit more stuff into my frame than the 18-200's "18"?
Looking forward to hear from anyone soon!
24th December 2009, 10:14 AM
Hi and welcome to the forum.
Simple answer is yes. Get a 10-2x (more on the x later)
The 10-2x will enable you to get a LOT more in the frame. All the landscape togs (myself included) swear by them.
Another user, a petrolhead, uses one on a jig to get all the car in on moving car shots.
Now, I say 10-2x as a very worthy other choice lens is the Sigma 10-20mm. This one is about £350 (not the newer £500 version Sigma just brought out) and so is a considerable saving over the Canon 10-22mm.
I personally went for the Canon, as most comparison reviews gave the Canon better marks for image quality (slightly) but they ALWAYS gave the Sigma the recommended award due to being a lot cheaper.
You won't go wrong with either.
24th December 2009, 10:29 AM
24th December 2009, 02:18 PM
Thank you so much :)
24th December 2009, 03:13 PM
An UWA lens is great for close-up stuff as well. You can get some really wacky angles by jamming the lens in real close. I love my Sigma 10-20. Easily my favourite lens and my most used. Can't comment on the Canon 10-22 as I've never used one but track down a sharp Sigma and you won't go wrong.
26th December 2009, 09:28 AM
I bought the canon lens today. There is a problem, when I put my polarizer filter on, the camera captures shadows around the corner of the frame at 10mm. The only way to avoid that is to take the filter off the lens. Is there something wrong with the filter or this lens is too ultra wide?
26th December 2009, 12:36 PM
For ultra wides you will need a slim line polariser.
This is the one I use.
26th December 2009, 12:36 PM
First, do you also have a UV filter on the lens? Ie, are you stacking two filters together? If so, you'll need to remove one. The basic issue is that the lens does have a very wide field of view at the 10mm end - wide enough to see the rim of the filter. It may be the case that some filters still have a rim that's deep enough to be seen at the wide end of the zoom range. When I got a UV filter for my 10-22, I specifically went for one with a low profile. I don't use a polariser with it, but I did notice that there are special low profile versions of those as well.
In general, a polariser has a deeper rim than other filters because it's actually two layers of filter and two rims - polarisers work by rotating two filters relative to each other. The rear rim screws into the front of the lens and holds one layer of filter, and the front rim rotates while holding the other layer of filter. The extra rim and layer of filter mean that they tend to be a bit deeper than normal single layer filters. For most lenses, this is fine, but can result in vignetting with a ultra-wide angle.
26th December 2009, 05:04 PM
You def need a slim filter and you will probably find that with the polariser you will get uneven blues in the sky at the 10mm end.
26th December 2009, 05:47 PM
yes forgot to say only one screw in at a time on the 10-2x. On fone at mo but search for threads started by me and for word filter, for info on using square filters with the 10-22mm.
30th December 2009, 08:30 AM
got a slim line version today, problem solved thanks all!
One more question, is a hood necessary for this lens? Will it causes the vignetting problem too?
30th December 2009, 01:20 PM
I haven't used mine without the hood, apart from on a foggy day with very difuse light. I would say that a hood should be used - the front element and filter are not recessed, and light coming in from the side could affect contrast. The Canon hood for it is a rigid petal-shaped design and fits onto an external bayonet just behind where the filter screws in, so there's no stacking issue like you'd get with a screw-in hood. The Canon part is EW-83E, and isn't bargain basement at something like 25 quid, but is probably worth it. I did get a wide petal type hood for another lens (cheapie from China), but it turned out to attach to the filter thread, and didn't attach very well (falls off).
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.11 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.