Canon EF-S 10-22mm Ultra Wide Angle Lens Review

[MacAndPhoto]

is it weather proof??

[christopherfrost]

@MacAndPhoto Nope

[MacAndPhoto]

@christopherfrost to bad, like thats all i need=D but du u know of any wide angle lenses that offers weather proofing with isn't to expensive?

[christopherfrost]

@MacAndPhoto I can't think of any I'm afraid. Your only option is to get a full frame camera like the Canon 5D or 1D, and get the 17-40mm f4 L USM lens.

[zipote90]

But, I want your baby too...

[FoxWins]

I know you mentioned to someone else that you would opt for the Tokina if you wanted to do film making. I'm sold on the 10-22 because of the focal length, the Tokina is more of a prime, and I won't solely be using it for film making, so do you think I would suffer with the Canon for film making?

[christopherfrost]

@FoxWins The Canon is fine for filmmaking. It's just that the aperture starts at 3.5 and narrows to 4, then 4.5 as you zoom in (and you can see it stepping down on the footage), but the Tokina is a lovely 2.8 whatever you do. It's really up to you. If you need something for low light situations, or if you need some kind of narrow depth of field, then go for the Tokina. If the focal range is more important to you (and 10-22mm is pretty good) then try the Canon :)

[FoxWins]

@christopherfrost Thanks for the incredibly speedy response. I think if I were using the Canon to film with, I would not be using more than one focal length anyway. It's not that the focal length is a huge biggie for me, it's just nice, y'know? Same with the 2.8. I think ISO compensation will satisfy. Thanks again!

[VirtuThe3rd]

Really nice review!

[jimbolimbo369]

What are your views on the Tokina 11-16mm?

[christopherfrost]

@jimbolimbo369 Fantastic. If you're more into film making then use the Tokina becuase of it's constant f2.8 aperture. 

[jimbolimbo369]

@christopherfrost yup, i do more filming than taking pictures, and the tokina works great.

[DinnenG]

for the love of god please no one spend $900 on this, you can get a wide angle and fish eye add on for a telephoto lens for around $30 and it's literally the same thing.

[christopherfrost]

@DinnenG Oh my gosh, I've used one of those and I can tell you I'd rather give someone the $30 to vigorously rub my entire head with a cheese grater. But if those monstrosities (which are not "literally the same thing" but in fact completely different) are really good enough for you then...then each to his own!!

[DinnenG]

@christopherfrost fair enough they wont be as good. but for the money you're saving, they are certainly better value for money. I would like the one in this video. but I'm not going to buy a lens which is almost as expensive as my camera haha.

[janernn]

Just ordered one! :D

Thanks for a nice review! If someone wanna see how not to do reviews then check out SigmaAmerica's channel. It's painful!

[christopherfrost]

@janernn Hehe I love the comments people leave on it ;) if ever you want a laugh, check out the Amazon customer reviews of the Sigma 200-500mm f2.8...

[janernn]

@christopherfrost LOL that's great! Thanks for the tip!

[Starfucker7777]

MUST get one ! Thx for the movie shots ^.^

[dennisplus1]

Amazing review!

[THEHAMM3T]

NOW THAT'S A GOOD REVIEW! THANK YOU!

[RdDrfjames]

Great review!

[David900924]

luv ur review..really great !! thx

[markopolo669]

Nice review!

[MAXXAM2104]

thanks so much for your help. i ve understandand better the lens and what i really need...

[Oreo555]

Outstanding review - Thank you.



[mxdvotion]

GREAT REVIEW! probably one of the best I've seen very informative. how would you compare this lens to the tokina 11-16? I tried on the 10-22 at my local camera shop and I was 1st of all disappointed by the really cheap feel of the lens. it felt cheaper than my kit lens. and 2nd of all by the slow aperture. I do a lot of work in low light and the tokina is f2.8 and its about $100 or more cheaper WITH the lens hood. I feel like that would be a better option. do you?

[xxgwyloxx]

Wow, I really like your review. Though I have a feeling I should've on watched this before I bought one. But still, a lovely review

[Hyminym]

Great job getting the info across!

I want to see more reviews.

[4670sayan]

for your kind information tokina 11-16mm F 2.8 is not chipo lens .......

[fipereira]

Great review!



[Meshwork123]

Terrific review. You went to a lot of trouble with the including of still images and video. I was going to sell my copy as I have the 16-35 for my full frame camera, but I'll keep it for my 40D!

[mrcool76789]

i like abrel distortion, its just my opinion

[criticalbuzzkill]

nice,

how much is this lense?

[christopherfrost]

@criticalbuzzkill About $900! You can get cheaper ones from Sigma...

[acidburnhigh]

@criticalbuzzkill got it just for 750€ together with lens hood and UV Filter

[xxgwyloxx]

@criticalbuzzkill I bought mine for $800USD.

[ravenoftheredsky]

@criticalbuzzkill It's all the way down to $720 now.

[ati566]

i brought a 10-22mm sigma 1:4 - 5:6 

[iamravenous]

It has already been proven that this lens is the same as an L. It's EF-S so it can't have the "L" designator.

[persuazn]

I'm new to DlSR filming :) I love the review. What are your top lens picks for filming?

[christopherfrost]

@persuazn Sigma 10-20mm f3.5, Sigma 17-50mm OS 2.8, and Sigma 30mm f1.4. They'll save you money on the Canon lenses (which are admittedly nicer)

[persuazn]

@christopherfrost thanks, but what did you mean admittedly nicer? sigma > canon lenses or vice versa?

[christopherfrost]

@persuazn Sorry - I think the Canon lenses are generally a little nicer in terms of build quality, autofocus, and optical qualities. But not not by much, especially when you onsider the money you could save by going with Sigma...

[RyanTheTuber]

Wonderful review Christopher!

I'm getting this year with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4!

[christopherfrost]

@RyanTheTuber GOOD choice ;)

[seljemann]

i think the lens is a waste of money...specially if you are going to get a full frame later.

[christopherfrost]

@seljemann Why do you think it's a waste of money, apart from if you're going to get full frame?

[cubeproduktion]

@christopherfrost Well, it does have a variable aperture and plasticky build quality compared to Canon's 8-15 fisheye, the 17-40 and the 16-35 L. I would rather get a 15 fisheye and the 14mm L Mark II than this but this lens is good for an APS-C ONLY user, cool review

[christopherfrost]

@cubeproduktion But fisheye is a totally different type of lens, and those 'L' lenses (starting at 16mm) won't be ultrawide on an APS-C. 10mm is hugely wider than 14mm, and the 14mm isn't as useful as it doesn't zoom.

[cubeproduktion]

@christopherfrost the fisheye effect on an APS-C camera isn't that noticeable but I would get these L lenses if I wanted weather sealing, great build and optical quality, have a fast aperture and if I am going full frame (which I will)

[camcrazed]

Thank you, what a good review, I found it very informative and helped me understand what to look for in a wide angle lens.

[CALAMARIVOLANTI]

Hi Chris! first of all thanks for he review!

i would like to ask your opinion: i want an ultra wide angle, and one of the purposes would be star trails shooting. so i would like a lens with very good quality and really good performance at f4 f4.5

i had the sigma 10 20 f4-5.6 but i was really disappointed with the quality, ended up discovering that it was a bad sample and returned it. i use a canon body (Rebel Xs).

which lens out of the Canon, Sigma, Tokina or Tamron would be the best? Thanks

[christopherfrost]

@CALAMARIVOLANTI The Tamron is cheap but has a poor reputation. Check out what dpreview.com say about it. It would get the job done though, and the image will be reasonably good stopped down to f5.6. I avoided it because sample images look pretty low-contrast to me. The Tokina's meant to be amazing but it's more suitable for those who need f2.8, e.g. filmmakers, as 11-16mm is not very versatile. Check some of the review websites! But the Tamron could have your name on it if you're stopping down.

[MrKnnknn]

Thank you for this amazing review! The only lens I currently have is the amazing canon 50mm f/1.4 mounted on a 7D body. I was considering the canon 17-40 f/4.0L lens as an addition, but now I am considering 10-22 instead (I know....). I mostly shoot still in daylight (I don't shoot video yet). The constant 4.0 on the L lens is really nice and so is the weather sealing. For wide angle shots, I am not interested in the blurring effect, what do you recommend? They are about the same price.

[christopherfrost]

@MrKnnknn You're welcome :-) I LOVE my 50mm f1.4! I'm gonna review it soon. You should get a fast, standard zoom lens. The Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS is the best. Check out my review. The image stabilization and f2.8 aperture, as well as similarly awesome picture quality, make it a much better choice than the 17-40 f4. However, if you're only interested in ultra-wideangle, get the 10-22mm. 10mm is much, much wider than 17mm!

[jamdvx]

I insist:

iF we understand the nature of a wide-angle, the nature of what is a curved glass - lenses, why to care about Distortion?? we know how a wide angle is even a fisheye user knows this perspective through glasses and opticals! - this lenses is expensive maybe - but excellent choice. So good review and excellent examples. Thank you XD

[M0JRA]

chris thanks for a great reivew ,found this a great help to me ,as i am looking bto get a wide angle lens

thanks

[NakedBellyDog]

Chris, I really like your reivew. I found it simple, informative, to the point, and informative. This is the best reveiw of the 10-22 I've seen so far. Thank you.

[fasteddy60]

I just bought the canon 10-22,I like it.Do I ,or should I use the "aftermarket" lens hood.Is it needed do you think? Ed

[gymbug813]

Great review! Just bought this lense for my fiance and seeing reviews like this is very reassuring!

[christopherfrost]

@gymbug813 Thanks - glad you enjoyed the review. With the financial investment it is good to have some reassurance! I'm going to review a few more lenses soon...

[santohang]

Nice review, helped a better understanding of this particular lens, but can't afford right now.

[notasplitter]

Very useful review. Well made too. Thanks Chris.

[skinheadsrulz]

VERY NICE

[PhantomLyric]

awesome! Thanks!