Canon Lens question! - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

01/24/2008 03:04:41 PM · #1

Okay so i had my mind set on the canon 70-200 USM f/4. But i just found out that a photography store is having a sale on used equipment, and one is a CANON EFS 10-22 3.5-4.5 USM 8+ (used). Right now i have the plastic cheap lens 18-55, which actually should not be classified as a lens. Anyways I would love to know people's opinions.

PHOTOKID

01/24/2008 03:08:35 PM · #2

I have the canon 70-200 USM f/2.8 IS and the CANON EFS 10-22 3.5-4.5 USM. Both lenses are great but I shoot alot of waterfalls and landscapes so the 10-22 has been my 2nd go to lens and I havent really played to my with the 70-200 f2.8 Go with what you shoot most often and figure out which lens would be better for that type. They are both excellent lenses.

Good Luck!

PhotoDave

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/24/2008 03:09:37 PM · #3

those two are at extreme end of the scale, it all depends on what you plan to shoot with it, I bought the 10-22mm on last Friday and cant get enough of it, I have been having a blast with it but also really love my 70-300IS as well... its a tough choice.

-dave

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/24/2008 03:11:43 PM · #4

they're on opposite ends so i don't know. I take a lot of indoor shots, and sometimes i go on excursions downtown to take urban shots. I don't take a lot of landscapes, but i think i would like to take more of them if i had the 10-22

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

01/24/2008 04:47:37 PM · #5

Well, do you find yourself more often wishing you were wider, or more telephoto then your 18-55?

Photologist

Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/24/2008 05:40:19 PM · #6

I have the "Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM". I also have a telephoto zoom, the "Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM", which is a bit different than the one you mentioned.

I use the longer lens for sports and outdoor portraiture. It's also good for candids, as you don't have to be in their "grill".

As for the 10-22...I absolutely love this lens. Not only is it great for landscapes, it's great for close quarters...inside rooms, inside a car, even inside an elevator! Check out some of my photos with this lens.

I've read that the 10-22 has best glass quality of any non-"L" lens. In fact, I've read that the only reason the 10-22 is not designated as an "L" lens is because of the "Short backed focus" design (the "S" in EF-S) for APS-C sensors.

Message edited by author 2008-01-24 17:59:13.

Retroesque

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/24/2008 05:56:02 PM · #7

Consider me biased but I'd grab that 10-22 in a heartbeat - GRIN!

I LOVE wide and I don't mind getting close up to a subject.

Perhaps you need to consider how you like to photograph - I've looked at some of your images (LOVELY!) and see some beautiful close up images, not sure if you took them from a distance or not.

I have little problem getting up close and personal, love the 10-22 in tight spaces, AND for landscapes.

Must say I don't have the other lens you're talking about but do have a 75-300 that virtually never makes it to me camera.

I have the 100mm 2.8 Macro that I love with equal passion as my 10-22mm.

So I guess you need to figure out 'Who are you? What do you want to do?'

01/24/2008 06:36:30 PM · #8

thanks :) The close up images are generally close up, i don't zoom in too much with my 18-55. I like doing portrait photography, and my friend reccommended me the 85mm f/1.8, but i'm not sure if that would be good for outdoor shots and stuff. I don't think i'm going to get the 70-200 just because it's more for wildlife and sports, which i never do.

So far i'm hearing good stuff about the 10-22, it's just that i don't take landscape shots often. Although it seems like it's also good for some outdoor stuff as well, so i am considering it.

Message edited by author 2008-01-24 18:37:26.

01/24/2008 06:54:06 PM · #9

The 85mm 1.8 is a great portrait lens. I have used it for other shots plenty of times. The 70-200mm is a good portrait lens as well.

But that 10-22mm I just got as well and it is stuck on my camera now. I am debating selling the 70-200mm F/4 L and buying a 70-200mm F/2.8 L just not sure if I need the extra money on IS or not.

01/24/2008 06:57:01 PM · #10

the 70-200 is a good portrait lens? Strange, I would think it would be terrible, unless you only wanted head shots.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/24/2008 07:02:42 PM · #11

Originally posted by cujee:

the 70-200 is a good portrait lens? Strange, I would think it would be terrible, unless you only wanted head shots.

Just take a look here:

//www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=2&view=submissions

One photo that stands out in my mind taken with the 70-20mm F/4 L is this one:

//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=460279 by

toddhead

Message edited by L2 - Forum Rule #7 - Not Safe for Work.

smurfguy

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/24/2008 07:12:30 PM · #12

Originally posted by cujee:

the 70-200 is a good portrait lens? Strange, I would think it would be terrible, unless you only wanted head shots.

Well, some people have more working room than others. Supposedly somewhere around 85mm is the ideal portrait length, and the 70-200 series are very high quality lenses, so there ya go.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/24/2008 10:23:13 PM · #13

Ugh, i don't know what to do :P
Everyone seems to be addicted to the 10-22, but based on the pics i take i would be better off with the 85 or the 70-200

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

01/24/2008 10:45:18 PM · #14

Tell you what.... summarise the images you have (there is software out there that will scan the EXIF and summarise for you... even LightRoom does it but you can scan manually) and see how many shots are on the 18 end vs the 55 end. If you are heavily at either end then pic that one first :-)

If not where do you feel constrained? Do you remember thinking I wish I could get closer or too close, I need to step back. Go to the end where you feel constrained.

In the longer run you will want both anyway, so you could just buy both :-) I hear they are sending rebate cheques again soon if you are in the US :-)

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/25/2008 01:01:35 AM · #15

For what it's worth, I use my 70-200 f/4L 1000x more than my 10-22mm. I've put maybe 40-50 frames through the 10-22 (since November) where as i've put several thousand through the 70-200 (since July). I find that it's almost TOO wide for my uses most of the time. I'm just about to the point of selling it because of that, just holding onto it for a while longer to see if I change my mind. And also for my Alaska trip this summer. :)

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

01/25/2008 01:13:41 AM · #16

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

I can understand that cause I am more of a long person also [I spend a month with just the 85mm attached when I got it - just as a way to force me to think in 85mm frames - and didn't have too much of an issue with that] with the 10-22 but I find I use it with the kids a lot.... Don't even bother looking thru the viewfinder, cause everything is in frame almost wherever you point it :-) and you can be right next to them.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/25/2008 02:01:51 AM · #17

Originally posted by cujee:

I have both lenses, actually. I use the 10-22mm probably 10x as much as I do the 70-200mm, for whatever that's worth. But that's just me, ya know? I couldn't live without my WA, it's how I *see*... The 70-200mm f/4L. for me, is only marginally hand-holdable. I nearly always use it on the tripod, and I bought the tripod collar for it so the rig would balance properly. That's gonna add close to $100 to the price, if you get it.

At 200mm, you really need 1/500 shutter speed to be safe. People will tell you it's the reciprocal of the focal length you need, and that 1/250 is fine, but with crop factor you have a 320mm lens and you need a faster shutter speed. This means you got to be shooting in very bright light or with a high ISO, basically. Since most of my shooting is done very early or very late, I need to use this lens on a tripod.

The 10-22mm is extraordinarily versatile. It has very low flare, even when the sun's actually IN the image, which it is a lot at 10mm. You gave to watch out for the stretching of objects at the edges when you have it zoomed out to 10mm, but that's the nature of ultrawide. At 22mm it's a decent, moderately-wide lens, the equivalent of about a 35mm lens on a FF camera. Back in the old days we considered 35mm to be where WA started happening. 20mm was very wide, 35mm was just starting to be wide. This lens is the equivalent of a 16-35mm on FF, and it's just (as I said before) SO versatile. I can't recommend it enough :-)

R.

Message edited by author 2008-01-25 02:02:10.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/25/2008 12:10:09 PM · #18

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

I'm looking at some of your shots, most of them seem to be wildlife. The 70-200 is great for wildlife and sport stuff, but i rarely shoot those types of subjects. I'm kind of narrowing it down between the 85mm and the 10-22 :)

cheekymunky

Canon EOS-40D

01/25/2008 12:34:46 PM · #19

Hi!
I have the 70-200, 10-22 and the 85. I like all three, but don't use the 10-22 as often as some, I guess I just don't 'think' in wide angle. 70-200 is probably my favourite lens, add some extention tubes and its useful for macro stuff as well. The 85mm is great, auto-focus is FANTASTIC, but I find it a tad long on the 1.6x, unless you have plenty of room. I'm gonna try and get the 50mm F1.4 for portraits.

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/25/2008 01:05:11 PM · #20

Originally posted by cujee:

Originally posted by SamDoe1:
For what it's worth, I use my 70-200 f/4L 1000x more than my 10-22mm. I've put maybe 40-50 frames through the 10-22 (since November) where as i've put several thousand through the 70-200 (since July). I find that it's almost TOO wide for my uses most of the time. I'm just about to the point of selling it because of that, just holding onto it for a while longer to see if I change my mind. And also for my Alaska trip this summer. :)

I'm looking at some of your shots, most of them seem to be wildlife. The 70-200 is great for wildlife and sport stuff, but i rarely shoot those types of subjects. I'm kind of narrowing it down between the 85mm and the 10-22 :)

Yes you're right that most are wildlife, but I LOVE landscapes. The only issue is that I'm not really ever in a place with nice landscapes and don't have the ability to travel much right now. Even then, when I set up for a landscape with the 10-22, it just seems TOO wide to me. The 28-75mm is the lens that usually lives on my camera and that seems just perfectly wide enough for me. Maybe it's a matter of opinion? Oh and I use the 70-200 and 28-75 for portraits.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/25/2008 01:20:22 PM · #21

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

Even then, when I set up for a landscape with the 10-22, it just seems TOO wide to me. The 28-75mm is the lens that usually lives on my camera and that seems just perfectly wide enough for me. Maybe it's a matter of opinion? Oh and I use the 70-200 and 28-75 for portraits.

Funny, you match me lens for lens. And I use the 10-22mm for probably 90% of my landscapes. But then, I live in a place of wide-open views. I actually use the 70-200mm for more landscapes than I do the 28-75mm, if it comes to that; I'm either way wide, or zoomed right in, it seems...

R.

01/25/2008 08:04:58 PM · #22

Originally posted by rex:

Originally posted by cujee:
the 70-200 is a good portrait lens? Strange, I would think it would be terrible, unless you only wanted head shots.

Just take a look here:

//www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=2&view=submissions

One photo that stands out in my mind taken with the 70-20mm F/4 L is this one:

//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=460279 by toddhead

Message edited by L2 - Forum Rule #7 - Not Safe for Work

How was that image not safe for work? I swear you are out to get me. What the hell? And if that is the case this wording needs to be changed:

Post Contains Adult Content (there is no need to check this box if you're only posting an adult thumb)

Message edited by author 2008-01-25 20:24:35.

geoffb

01/25/2008 08:26:05 PM · #23

Originally posted by rex:

Originally posted by rex:
One photo that stands out in my mind taken with the 70-20mm F/4 L is this one:

//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=460279 by toddhead

Message edited by L2 - Forum Rule #7 - Not Safe for Work

How was that image not safe for work? I swear you are out to get me. What the hell?

In fairness to L2, if I opened that up just as my boss came by, I'd have some explaining to do.

Message edited by author 2008-01-25 20:27:49.