Canon EF-S 10-18mm F/4.5-5.6. Yay or Nay? For wedding photography?

[NedM]

I'm just starting out in wedding photography and I stumbled across this lens!
I already have myself a 70-200mm, but I need something wide and affordable to capture those group shots!

At just $299 retail, the Canon 10-18mm looks like a great choice! And with Black Friday just around the corner, I can't imagine what the price would drop to!

Here are some pros and cons I put together for this lens:

Pros:
Cheap value
STM Focus Motor
Quality Optics
Image Stabilization
Full-Time Manual Focusing

Cons:
Made of plastic
Not weather sealed


What do you guys think?
Would this lens be a good investment for those just starting out in wedding photography?

 

[CameraClicker]

On your 550D or similar body, 10 mm will let you back into a corner of the reception hall and shoot the whole room. You will get quite a bit of floor and ceiling so you might want to crop it later. With really, really wide lenses, there tends to be distortion at the edges where everything is stretched out a little. Not the best for shooting people, but it lets you fit them in where you otherwise would not be able to. There are software solutions for post processing but some of them are a pain.

We were at dinner with friends last night and asked the waitress to take a group photo for us. She took 4. There were 5 of us around a table. As usual I had my 18-250 so I put on a flash and gave the zoom a bit of a spin then asked her to stand almost as far away as the room permitted. EXIF says 31 mm focal length. The camera was in P mode with ETTL flash. It worked pretty well, everyone in focus and not much clean up required.

 

[NedM]

On your 550D or similar body, 10 mm will let you back into a corner of the reception hall and shoot the whole room. You will get quite a bit of floor and ceiling so you might want to crop it later. With really, really wide lenses, there tends to be distortion at the edges where everything is stretched out a little. Not the best for shooting people, but it lets you fit them in where you otherwise would not be able to. There are software solutions for post processing but some of them are a pain.

Well, my initial use was to use the wide focal length to capture large groups of about 4-6 people. I know the wider the focal length the distorted the photo would become near the edges. I don't plan on using 10mm often, I'm looking to stick somewhere between 16-18mm when using this lens. I'll probably use 10mm for much wider shots such as the inside of the church and the reception! Thanks for you input!

 

[Bobby Ironsights]

I lust after this lens, I have the 18-55 and 55-200 kits but sometimes wider is better.

 

[JohnnyWrench]

You forgot the biggest Con... f/4.5-5.6.

 

[bratkinson]

Ditto what JohnnyWrench said. When used in other than bright lighting, a flash will be required, and it will have to be a 440EX or bigger to get enough light for those wide shots. Note, too, that folks' noses get 'bigger' when shot with a wide angle lens. I'm guessing large peoples' stomachs 'grow' as well.

When I had a 30D and later 60D, my EF-S 18-135 IS was my workhorse. 18mm (FOV of a theoretical 28.8mm on a crop body) was wide enough for small group shots as close as 10 feet or so. At 18mm, noses aren't a problem as long as they are not too close to the camera.

 

[CameraClicker]

You forgot the biggest Con... f/4.5-5.6.

f/4.5-5.6 isn't a concern. I have Sigma's 10-20MM F4-5.6 EX DC HSM, and I have Canon's EF 16-35 f/2.8 L. Both lenses focus extremely closely, and even wide open almost everything is in focus at the short end. The hyper-focal distance is quite close at 16 mm and it moves closer at 10 mm. ISO noise has been improving for years and most of the current cameras are clean enough. If you need a flash, having a lens that's a stop or two faster is not going to save you from needing it. Using the shutter speed rule of thumb, at 10 mm you only need 1/10th second. The challenge with people is having them not move, but I wouldn't normally use a lens that short for people anyway. If I were purchasing 16-35 mm for full frame today, I would get the f/4 with image stabilization instead of the f/2.8.

I think bratkinson means a 430 EX II. With the diffuser in place, it gives a nice even light for 10 mm. Surprisingly the pop-up does a reasonable job, too. There is minor fall off at the sides and bottom, but less than the 430 EX II has if the diffuser is not used.