Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Who's got a 10-22?

KingBee Plus
11 529 2 Scotland
11 Mar 2014 4:00PM
Dave, I doubt that I shall ever move to full frame in the future. In fact, I was on the point of giving up on DSLRs altogether because of their bulk and weight, and was doing more and more with my M4/3 Panasonics. Then I discovered the Canon EOS 100D, am totally delighted with it, and suddenly I'm back in the DSLR game!

I still have a 40D on which my 17-40L resides almost permanently, but the combined bulk and weight of these two means that they hardly ever see the light of day, and I think I shall be selling both. I did plan to use to use the resulting cash to add to/improve on my M4/3 hardware, but the EOS 100D is one mean little machine and is only fractionally bigger than my Panasonic G3. Of course, lenses for the 100D in general aren't as small as those for the G3, but it still makes for one helluva compact outfit. And the 10-22 is nice and light, relatively speaking.

So, a decent UWA to go with the 100D could be a plan, and it makes sense to go with the 10-22 or one of the Tokinas, because they'll do better on a crop sensor. I've tried the 17-40 on the 100D and image quality is certainly very good - it's just not as wide as I'd like.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

colin beeley Plus
15 1.2k 10 England
11 Mar 2014 5:16PM
sell the 17-40 & put the cash towards the canon ef-s 10'22 you will be very happy Wink
Dave_Canon 11 1.4k United Kingdom
11 Mar 2014 6:43PM
I understand the weight issue and bought a Bridge camera last year so that I can go lightweight sometimes. I have a ticket for the Cheltenham Races tomorrow but will have to take a DSLR with 24-105mm and 70-200mm f2.8 (1.5Kg). I will certainly struggle to carry this kit all day but it is the only way I can get the images I need.

colin beeley Plus
15 1.2k 10 England
11 Mar 2014 6:49PM
get a canon 28/300 L IS , heavy but does the business.
keithh Plus
14 25.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
11 Mar 2014 6:59PM
Heavy, slow and horrendously over-priced....because few people ever buy one.
colin beeley Plus
15 1.2k 10 England
11 Mar 2014 7:22PM
heavy yes, slow ! i use one for sport no problem seen the pros with them at santa pod fastest motor sport on the planet ! by second hand that's the way to go Wink
colin beeley Plus
15 1.2k 10 England
11 Mar 2014 7:32PM
here are a couple of shots taken with a canon 28/300 - here and here
KingBee Plus
11 529 2 Scotland
11 Mar 2014 8:43PM
Taking all of the above into consideration, there seems to be a general bias towards the 10-22, and judging by all the reviews I've read (and God knows, I seem to have done nothing but read reviews over the last day or so!) it would certainly give me more than enough bang for my buck - in which connection I'm intrigued to note that Amazon, for example, is selling the Canon 10-22 for slightly less than the Tokina 11-16. I thought the Tokina was supposed to be a cheaper alternative ........

I'm not even going to think about the Sigma - my brain hurts enough as it is.

As for the 28-300, well, that's a whole different ball game, and not one in which I wish to take part.

Thanks to all for their most helpful input and insight.
DerekL 13 188 24 England
11 Mar 2014 9:01PM
I use a Sigma 10-22mm on my Canon 30D/40D cameras and personally find the results better than my Canon 17-40mm L, especially regarding sharpness.
Gruditch 4 16 England
12 Mar 2014 3:48PM
I used to have a 10-22 but traded it in for a 17-40. I didn't think the 10-22 was optically better, and not even in the same ball park when it came to build quality.
Gruditch 4 16 England
12 Mar 2014 8:52PM
Ah sorry Derek, I just noticed you said Sigma, I had a Canon 10-22. Do they make a Sigma 10-22 ?
12 Mar 2014 10:56PM
Hi, I had the 10-22 on a Canon 40D and was sad I could no longer use it when I got a 5D mk2 as it's not compatible with the full frame sensor. I loved that lens a and would recommend it to anyone. I found it as good as my present 17-40 L for image quality. It wasn't built as robustly but that wasn't an issue for my photography. Wink
MalcolmS Plus
12 1.2k 13 England
13 Mar 2014 1:03PM
Can't believe that there hasn't been more take-up on my comments on the Sigma 10-20. Whenever there is a thread on here about ultra wide angle lenses it invariably comes out on top with the 10-22mm Canon considered not worth the extra money.
simon13 10 19 United Kingdom
15 Mar 2014 9:59AM
Can't comment on the Sigma 10-20. Had a Sigma 28-300 for one day before taking it back as the pictures were worse than a disposable camera smeared in Vaseline.
Then I got a Sigma 20-40mm EX DG with a camera I bought second hand. At least the pictures were sharp with this lens but severely lacking in contrast so I moved that on too. Maybe I've just been unlucky but I don't think I would ever buy a Sigma again.

I've got the Canon 10-22 and use it on a 40D, brilliant lens.
Gruditch 4 16 England
15 Mar 2014 12:04PM
A bit unfair to rate every Sigma lens buy the performance of the 28-300, that is a truly terrible lens.
I felt real sorry for the sucker who bought mine. Wink

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.