Home  Donate  New  Search  Gallery  Reviews  How-To  Books  Links  Workshops  About  Contact

Canon 10-22mm
© 2011 KenRockwell.com
Please help KenRockwell..com

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

I got mine here. I'd also get it here or here.

NEW: How to Use Ultrawide Lenses 11 August 2008

November 2011   More Canon Reviews   Canon Lenses   All Reviews

 

INTRODUCTION

B&H Photo - Video - Pro Audio

Ritz Camera

I use Adorama, Amazon, eBay, Ritz, B&H, Calumet, J&R and ScanCafe. I can't vouch for ads below.

This is a great lens. It's so great it makes me want to swap over to Canon from Nikon, because it's better than my favorite Nikon 12 - 24 mm lens. It's better because it has less distortion and costs less. I paid over $1,000 for my Nikon; this superior 10 - 22 sells for $840 here, here or here.

This was announced in August 2004. If I shot a Canon 1.6x camera I'd have one of these in an instant!

 

SPECIFICATIONS top

Specifications    Performance    Recommendations

Name

Canon calls this the Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5 - 4.5 USM

   EF: Electronic Focus

   -S: Designed only for the smaller 1.6x sensor of the 20D, 30D and Rebel.

   USM: Ultra-Sonic Motor. Focuses silently.

 

Optics

Thirteen elements, ten groups.

One aspheric and one super UD

 

Diaphragm

stops down to f/22-29.

 

Minimum Focus

9.5 inches (24cm)

 

Size

3.5" long

 

Weight

13.6 oz. (385 g.)

 

Filter

77mm, the professional standard

 

Case

LP1319, optional.

 

Hood

EW-83E. The bayonet hood is optional and unnecessary, except for physical protection. I wouldn't buy it; my Nikon hoods that come standard stay home in their boxes.

 

Price (USA)

$840, November 2011

$700, 2006.

 

PERFORMANCE   back to top

Specifications    Performance    Recommendations

Great! I'd buy one in an instant if I shot Canon.

 

Distortion

The Canon 10-22mm has much less distortion than any wide zoom I've tested, which means it's much better than my Nikon 12-24mm., much better than the Tamron 11-18mm, much better than the Tokina 12-24mm and much better than the Sigma 10-20mm, period. No contest: compare the numbers in my wide digital zoom comparison. It's also much better than the Canon 17-40mm L and 16-35mm L used on full frame digital and film cameras. Bravo!

The good news is that the 10 - 22's distortion is also trivial to correct completely in PhotoShop CS2. Use the figures below and plug them into the right place explained on my page on fixing lens distortion. If you do that the distortion cancels completely.

at 50 feet (15m):

10 mm: Barrel. Use +2.0 to correct as I explain in fixing lens distortion. It has just a little bit of residual waviness, much less than the 16-35mm L or 17-40mm L lenses do on a film or full-frame sensor camera. By comparison my Nikon 12 - 24 mm at 12 mm needs about +3.0 and is still a bit wavy after correction. Darn; I want one of these.

12mm: +2.0, no waviness, works perfectly.

14mm: +0.5.

17mm: Neutral, no distortion.

20mm: Almost perfect, maybe correct with -0.1.

22 mm: Almost perfect, maybe correct with -0.1.

These figures come from hours and of research. Use them all you want for your own photography, but because this research is copyrighted and registered any other use (like putting them in your own book or website) requires permission.

 

LATERAL CHROMATIC ABERRATION
(LCA or Corner Color Fringes)

10mm: Very little.

12mm: Very little.

14mm: Almost none.

17mm: none.

20mm: none.

22mm: none.

 

Flash

The 10 - 22 is so wide that it will cast a shadow from the flash at the bottom of the image at 10 mm with built in flash. It's OK at 22mm. Be careful. Tip: usually turning the camera upside down will throw this shadow into the sky where you usually won't see it!

 

RECOMMENDATIONS   back to top

Specifications    Performance    Recommendations

If I shot with Canon 1.6x cameras this would be the lens I'd use most often. I'd get one pronto!