Camera Labs

Hello everyone.

I have a Canon 7D and have been using the Canon 17-40mm f/4.0 L lens for my landscape photography.

However, being a cropped frame body, the lens does not actually give me the wide angle views that I want ( It's 1.6 crop factor right?)

I love the lens and have no qualms about it's optical quality and sharpness.

Is it advisable to switch the L lens for a 10-22mm EFS lens which would give me the 16-35mm range that I want?

What do you recommend? Are there other lenses I could consider?

Thanks
Sairam

There are a few options (some cost more than others)

If landscape photography is your main interest then

1) Swap camera for 5DII and keep 17-40

2) Get L bracket and tripod and shoot multiple shots with 17-40 in portrait orientation and stitch.

If not thinking of a FF camera in near future, buy 10-22 which I think is a great lens

_________________
Canon EOS 400D, EF-S 18-55mm, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 50mm f/1.8 MK I, EF-S 10-22mm, EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, EF 28mm f/1.8, EF 85mm f/1.8
Canon 430EX II, Manfrotto 055CXPRO3, Arca Swiss P0
Panasonic GF3, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Olympus 45mm f/1.8

MY FLICKR!

It depends on how wide you really want to go. Top of my shortlist would be the extremely wide Sigma 8-16mm, but is that wider than needed here? The Canon 10-22 is always a safe choice, also consider the Sigma 10-20 original version for a low budget option. If you don't care about or can work around massive distortion, I find the Samyang 8mm fisheye to be great fun and its highly affordable too.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

I just upgraded to the 7D a couple of months back so It might be a while before I get a full frame camera.

I'm really torn because the 17-40 is an excellent lens, but I've heard good things said about the 10-22 as well.

In terms of sharpness and quality how would you compare the 10-22 and 17-40?

On a crop frame camera, the EF 17-40mm f/4L can be found here.
And here is a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 review.

What are you wanting this lens to do? They have two different uses on a crop frame body.

If you are wanting to do landscapes, then you generally want something wider than 17mm. Also, if you are doing landscapes, you are generally at f/8 - f/12. This means you do not need a particularly fast lens. When I wanted a landscape lens, I saved some money and got the older Sigma and do not regret this decision.

_________________
Canon Rebel XTi, BG-E3 Grip
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes

I mainly need the wide angle for landscapes.

the Sigma looks a promising option!

How does the Sigma stand up against the Canon 10-22?

I agree that most landscaping is done at f/8 - f/11 , but on the occasions when I need to step into f/16, or f/22 does the Sigma have the same sharpness as the Canon?

I have the 7D and a 10-22 mm, and it's my favorite lens. I have used it a lot.
17 mm isn't very wide on a crop frame camera if you shoot landscape.
Maybe you can borrow one and see what it's like, or just try it out in a shop.

If you want to go with canon or sigma I don't know what to recommend, but I would defenetly go with something wider than 17 mm

The problem with stepping down too much is that diffraction sets in and you get less things in focus, not more.

When I went to various websites to compare the lenses in the past, there was little difference between the lenses in terms of optical quality at higher apertures, though I do not recall anything being tested at f/20 in comparison.

If you need to stop down that far, you might want to consider looking at a ND filter.

_________________
Canon Rebel XTi, BG-E3 Grip
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes

a bit of shameless self promotion and some promotion for the Sigma 10-20.

_________________

My Canon 10-22mm EF-S is one of my favorite lenses! I thought it would be of fairly limited usefulness, but have found it more widely useful than anticipated, a true favorite.

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm Pancake, 135L, 50L, 35L, pre-II 50mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S; Tokina 17mm & 100mm 2.8 Macro

This is getting tougher than anticipated

The reason I would want to stop down so far is to get effects like starburst, etc . But that would be fairly limited

I guess I have to try both the Sigma and the Canon out.

The sigma seems to be only 2/3 rds the price of the Canon which is tempting but I've never bought third party lenses till now.

Most people will say to check it out in the shop, but unless that shop has some decent scenery, the only thing you'll ascertain is how wide it can go, the distortion and focusing speed. Don't be afraid to buy used either.

It's long-winded, but you've got to have a good read about the >10mm options. Check out reviews for;

Canon 10-22
Sigma 8-16
Sigma 10-20 f/3.5
Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6
Tamron 10-24
Tokina 11-16

Here's another example with the f/4 sigma; http://fav.me/d4j5qg0

_________________

I can't weigh in about the lenses you are looking at but don't fear 3rd part lenses. If you read good reviews about the lens you can feel resonably safe. I have a Sigma 18-120 and a Tamron 70-300 that I enjoy.

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS

I personally recomend the Sigma if money is something that bothers you - I like getting CAnon things for my canon body and Olympus things for my Olympus body but I have used sigma before and they have been around jsut as long as everyone else.

People always go on about how great European cars are but Japanese cars can sometimes be just as good for half the price. The same can apply to differnet brands of cameras.

IMO, Ive seen some horrible Canon lenses (the 75-300 5.6-6.3 comes to mind) But some people still buy them because its made by Canon.

Im planning on getting the Sigma soon mainly because I just bought a Canon 70-200 f/4 IS USM and money IS an issue to me at the moment. And in the end, its the photo that matters.

I have a guy where I live, I call him Uncle John because eveyone knows a guy like him - who always gets the best top most expensive gear and doesnt know how to use it. Hes always asking me why my oly is so small and why I dont use L lenses on my canon. To me, part of the reason I got the white Canon telephoto was because I needed it and to shut that guy up and bash him with the lens if he talks to me again in the field. But if you dont have an Uncle John then whos going to care about your lenses if its all Canon, unless the image is rubbish.

Theres nothing wrong with Sigma and Tamron - Personally Id never buy a Tamron becuase I never like the build quality and if I bought one I think it would crumble in my hands but I would deffinately consider Sigma. And a Caveat: Tamron make good lenses - the Glass in one of their 2.8 and 1.8 lenses are fantastic - they make great pics, but I cant buy one because I just never felt confident running etc with them on my camera.

Oh and if weather sealing is important, Id get the canon if thats something your camera body has too that you feel you need.

_________________
1) Olympus OM1 [Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.8]
2) Pentax MZ-60 [Sigma 28-90 & 100-300]
3) Canon 7D [EF-S 15-85 & 70-200mm f/4 IS]

Leo's Flickr Page

Hahahaha.. .. Well, it's true, in the end, it's the photo that counts. I'll do some more research on the Sigma. It seems to be almost a steal for the price. Got to get rid of some other Canon lenses first though, the 28-135 Kit lens and the 55-250 Zoom lens to get the money for the Sigma