Worth Buying a 10-22mm?

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by Bruce_h, Mar 26, 2008.

  1. Bruce_h

    Bruce_h TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I am going on a trip to Asia, including Mount Everest, and I was told to make sure to bring a wide angle lens. Currently I have a Canon 40D with the stock EF - S 17-85mm f/4 - 5.6, and a Canon 70-200mm L IS. The only lens I could find wider is a 14mm L series (can't seem to find it on a Canadian site), and the Canon EF-S 10-22mm F/3.5 - 4.5? Is the 10-22mm really going to make that much of a difference over the 17-85mm for width? If not I'd rather spend my money on some other lens... Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks!
     
  2. Yahoozy

    Yahoozy TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    640
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Marcos, CA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    17mm is technically a wide angle, and is probably all you need
    although a 10-20mm is a cool lense to have, if your only going to need it this one time stick with the 17 and buy something else
     
  3. Steph

    Steph No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Steventon, Oxfordshire, UK
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Oh yes!!! A few miliimeter diffence on a wide angle lens makes a huge difference in terms of field of view. On a 40D the diagonal field of view is about 76 degrees with a 17mm whereas it is about 106 degrees with a 10mm.
     
  4. Drake

    Drake TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Messages:
    684
    Likes Received:
    10
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    If I were you I'd go for it. There's nothing better for landscape photography than proper wide angle lens.
     
  5. andrew99

    andrew99 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Look at the Sigma 10-20, I have one for my Nikon and I love it! It goes *much* wider than my 18-55 it lens.
     
  6. D-50

    D-50 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,043
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Calling a 17mm lens a wide angle is misleading. when shooting landscapes especially mountains a 10mm is very useful and truly deserves the distinction of being called wide angle
     
  7. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I went with the Sigma 10-20 (not saying you should get it, but that's just what fit in my budget)

    10mm is VERY wide compared to 17mm. If you have the budget room, go for it. 10mm certainly is fun to play with, and takes some nice landscape shots.
     
  8. Village Idiot

    Village Idiot No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,274
    Likes Received:
    406
    Location:
    Shepherdsturd, WV / Almost, MD
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Not when everything is still judged by 35mm standards. That's why the 10-20's and 10-22's are UWA, Ultra Wide Angle
     
  9. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,817
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I absolutely recommend an ultra wide angle lens like the EF-S 10-22mm.

    It's a great lens for landscape shooting.
     
  10. Bruce_h

    Bruce_h TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    That would be a definite yes! Thanks everybody!
     
  11. Garbz

    Garbz No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    203
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Given that mountains don't tend to move very much I would go with a tripod and some software like Autopano pro. THen I choose just how wide I want wide to be using multiple exposures.
     
  12. Mav

    Mav TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,457
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    If I shot Canon, the EF-S 10-22mm would be one of the first lenses I'd buy, along with the 17-85IS you already have, and then a 70-200 f/4L IS. I love Canon glass. For ultra ultra wide, I'd also consider the Sigma 10mm fisheye which they have a Canon mount for. It'll give a 167-degree angle of view on Canon, which will make even the 10mm rectilinear lenses look long. I have the Nikon 10.5DX fisheye for the Nikon system and love it.

    Fisheyes can be a bit tricky, but as long as you pay attention to composition you won't even have to mess with distortion. There's also plenty of software out there to adjust fisheye images into pretty much anything you want. Here's one from my Nikon with some processing work done but no distortion adjustments or transformations at all.

    Taroko Gorge, Taiwan
    [​IMG]


    The fisheye is one of my favorite lenses, and I love it so much and find it so flexible that I haven't even bothered with a traditional rectilinear wide angle lens like the Nikon 12-24DX.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

10-22mm worth it

,

10-22mm street photography

,
14mm ou 10-22mm
,
canon 10-22mm for street photography
,
canon 10-22mm vs canon 14mm
,

canon 14mm vs 10-22mm

,
is 10-22mm worth it
,
is a .22 worth buying
,
where to buy canon 10-22mm san marcos, ca
,
worth buying a 10-22mm