|
I really do like my 10-22mm EF-S, a truly useful lens, with quite good build quaility, but I do not have a 17-85mm, so it is difficult for me to say what you would be missing by not having the 10mm to 17mm zoom range. Keep in mind that ultra-wide images which try to "take it all in" can be empty and boring, so try to learn about using ultra-wides before the holiday. An ultra-wide is more for getting close to a subject, than trying to record an image of half the world, at distance, with one click. I am certainly not discouraging you from the 10-22mm!
Upon further reflection, compared to a kit zoom lens which starts at 18mm, with which I am familiar, I believe my 10-22mm is truly useful, though build quality and pride of ownership are part of that equation. Another lens I had considered, the 15-85mm, has an excellent reputation among members of this forum. 15mm, with the 1.6 crop factor, is equivalent in field-of-view to a 24mm on "full" frame. On a full-frame camera, 24mm is started to become really wide, though not what is generally termed ultra-wide. Ultra-wide-angle lenses are an acquired taste. If possible, perhaps try one that is borrowed, rented, or hired, before purchasing?
_________________ 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
|