Canon 10-22, Did I get a bad lens?

[Stormchase]

I have had the itch to get into landscape shooting and really wanted to pick up an WA or UWA lens. I have been using my kit lens 18-55 on an older rebel XS. I have been fairly happy with it for what it is but wanted a nice sharp piece of glass for getting deeper into it.
I was looking into L lenses but have been having a hard time justifying the price right now for a new avenue of shooting. I did macro before mostly and invested into that.
I stopped by a camera shop today and picked up a 10-22 EF-S usm. From the research i did it seems like a great lens for a crop sensor. Even heard they used the same elements in the L series. good deal at $617 and i picked up a Hoya CPF and hood. Excited to get home and click off a few! I shot about 20 random shots at F/8 with no filters in shade and sun. 10mm 15mm 22mm and loaded them up to take a look. I cringed! they seemed real soft for what i was expecting. Now i know its not a L series but i was thinking it would have been better then my kit lens. I think they are about the same or maybe.. I hate to say it .. softer. I have 90 days to try it out but i was wondering if anyone has time on this lens. I read 10 or so reviews giving it the thumbs up. Watched the reviews as well. All seemed to like it. Only a couple said it was a little too much $$ compared to sigma etc.. Wondering if i should have spent the few hundred more for an L?
Thoughts?

 

[pgriz]

Used this lens on my T1i for at least two years now. It's very good. Maybe you should post some images to show what you consider "soft" and how it compares with your kit lens. My other lens are the 24-105L, 70-200 f/4 ISM and the 90mm macro from Tamron. It isn't as sharp as those, but you have to really pixelpeep to see the difference.

 

[snerd]

Yes, post some images. I've used it on my 7D with good results.

 

[Big Mike]

I used one for years and I loved it. Never had a problem with less than sharp images.

 

[pgriz]

If you think the lens is the problem, then the way to find out is to do a controlled test, with your camera on a tripod, all vibration-causing effects minimized, and a clear, detailed target which you should be able to shoot with both lenses (using the same aperture, shutter speed, manual focus), and then see what difference(s) you see. Otherwise, it can be anything - your shooting technique, the choice of the wrong AF points, the camera or something else entirely.

 

[Stormchase]

Ok, Thank you for the replies. Great advice as always and that's why I am here. I brought my camera to work so I could shoot something in natural light but my card was still in my PC... So with that said I came home at night and did a flash shot when i got home. Tripod, 2 sec timer. (on carpet). I couldn't match the MM perfect but I did try to get close without hitting the end of the focal length.
Just did a transfer to JPEG to post here. nothing done. I still do not see much of a difference but the 10-22 seems a little more saturated. witch I do like. Neither seem much sharper then the other. What do you think? Let me know if there is a better situation i could shoot to see the difference and ill do my best. I was thiking texture would be good.
EDIT: I fixed the white balance because it was just annoying to look at. (shade to flash)
Kit lens: ef-s 18-55
F/8
1/500
21mm
IMG_3134 by Stormchase73, on Flickr

ef-s10-22 usm lens:
F/8
1/500
18mm
IMG_3133 by Stormchase73, on Flickr

 

[pgriz]

When comparing images between two lenses, do a 100% crop at the center (say 600x800) and a similar crop at one of the corners. Then you can compare and see if there is a difference. It's hard to see on a resized image. Try to get the exact same focal length because otherwise, you're also dealing with size effects. and finally, shoot the lenses at whichever aperture is common lowest for both lenses - if the lenses are soft, they are usually softest at their widest aperture.

 

[snerd]

I'm out of town and only have my funky laptop, so I can't really offer much help with these images. The video is really bad on this thing.

 

[Stormchase]

Ok i hope this can help a little. Im not completely sure on a 100% crop but i did my best. They are 404 x 310. This is the bottom left corner of the shot. about 15% of the width. (im new to PP and LR5) and I think that i lost the original pictures. so this is what i got. I think there should be more of a difference then this. I noticed the 10-22 is darker , more saturated, and has more vignetting. but seeing clarity is my challenge.
I shot with the common between the 2. 1/500, F/4, ISO100, 18mm.
here is the kit lens
IMG_3143 by Stormchase73, on Flickr
and the 10-22
IMG_3142 by Stormchase73, on Flickr

 

[pgriz]

Stormchase: Hard to tell.

Here's an image I took recently with the 10-22mm lens. Focal length was 10mm. ISO=100, f/11, 1/40 sec. tripod mount, remote shutter release. Image processed in Canon DPP, Lens aberration correction applied (peripheral illumination, chromatic aberration, color blur and distortion correction). No noise reduction, but basic sharpening (strenth=8, fineness=0, threshold=3) that I apply to most of my images was applied to the full-sized RAW file. Then, resizing was done as described below:

First image is resized from 4752x3168 to 1200x800, and JPG sharpened to sharpness=50.

Second image is 100% crop of the center region, 800x533, JPG sharpened to sharpness = 50.

Third image is 100% crop of the upper left region, 800x533, JPG sharpened to sharpness = 50.

Without aberration correction, #3 above would show pretty obvious chromatic aberration. With the correction applied, it is almost invisible.
Furthermore, note the detail of the branches at 100%

My conclusion is that this lens gives me the UWA coverage I want, while still rendering the detail very well. With the lens aberration correction applied via DPP, the distortion, chromatic aberration and peripehral illumination (vignetting) is compensated for.

 

[Stormchase]

Here is the full shot. just had to drop the crop. with the 10-22
IMG_3142-2 by Stormchase73, on Flickr
and here is "middle" shot.
IMG_3142-3 by Stormchase73, on Flickr
not really the corner but it should be an area of detail fade. Still pretty good i think
IMG_3142-5 by Stormchase73, on Flickr
That's a great example. Its pretty sharp in the middle. Looks like it might be about the same as mine on the outside but i may be cropped just a little tighter (car). So thinking that, to (up) my quality 50% on the outside crop it should be just like your snow shot. Nice shot BTW. CA is better on the new lens. I need to keep in mind that Im on a Rebel XS body. 10MP. I think ill be happy with it. I just need to go out and shoot! I haven't used it but for testing so far.
thanks so much for all of your input! still up for more if anyone wants to add.