How "ultra wide" is this compared to my 10-22 lens, when it is set to 10mm?
754196
Speaking from my experience with the Rokinon 8mm, which is a little wider than your 10-22, it is noticeably less wide. At lower focal ranges the difference between a few mm's is more significant than when higher. This lens has very little to no distortion which is the reason i finally made the switch form the much wider 8mm, and honestly you get more detail when zoomed in a little more.
754197
Set your 10-22mm to 16mm and it will be the same as that. Take a picture at 16mm and another at 10mm and compare the difference.
754198
Hey so the diagonal angle of view for this lens is 79.5 degrees compared to 107 degrees at 10mm. If you'd like to see what that equates to visually Lonely Spec has a great article on picking on a lens for Milky Way photography that visually shows the difference for ASP-C and full frame lenses.
219910
Its a great lens but obviously very different from the 10-18mm f4. I use the 24mm Zeiss almost exclusively indoors because it gets me to an equivalent focal length close to 35mm and helps with low light because of the wide 1.8 aperture. It also gets the nice shallow depth of field with that wide aperture and nice bokeh. I would love to own the 10-18 f4 but it would really be for a totally different purpose - super wide outdoor landscapes. Also, it's a slower lens with that f4 aperture and won't get a shallow depth of field under really any circumstances.
942878
In my experience, you'll get very much the same pic with the 10-24 between 18-24mm as you would with the 18-105. That's one reason I sold it. The 10-24 should be shot at 10mm, which is why you're buying it in the first place and why it costs so much (Just my opinion of course). http://www.amazon.com/review/R1HCPRMG89GYZO/ref=cm_cr_dp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN;=B0026FCKC8&nodeID;=502394&tag;=&linkCode;=
1376610
this lens is not wide like a go pro - it's more like a 24-70 on a full format camera, a go pro would be along the lines of a 10? If you want a go pro effect you would be better off with a fish-eye prime.
1397369
It's wide angle-ish... not like fisheye but I do get a tad bit of distortive curve. Check out Digital Rev's review on youtube... there's examples of the pic. I definitely notice a difference between this lens and my lumix 20 mm. It's an awesome lens!
1839504
It's pretty darn clear. Obviously not as clear as say a swarovski or a leopold at 24x but you will see your bullet impacts at a very long ways away and the front focus really helps with clarity. At 10x though (where I usually keep it for most shots) it's super super clear.
960473
I've always considered lenses of less than 35 mm "wide-angle". It's a matter of degree, but I would consider 28mm a wide angle lens. Since around 50mm is "standard" focal length, it is quite a bit wider than that.
2171693
2.8 is the maximum aperture at minimum zoom. I no longer own thing lens. But I believe it goes to f22. It is either 16 or 22.
1354146
It depends on how close you're talking about. 17mm isn't extremely wide like say a 10mm but it should unless you're standing really close to them. With any focal length running in that range you're still apt to get the occasional focal distortion such as rounded edges. To me it's still maybe my favorite lens that I've ever owned.
1936778
Mine is excellent. I'd never read anything where this particular lens is bad. Wide open you'll get purple fringe. But you'll get that on most 85mm lenses. Stopped down at a lower f stop is clean. You can always get rid of the fringe in Photoshop if you prefer to shoot wide open. But you may not need to, seeing that the lens is a low light shooting lens. Beautiful lens and a steal compared to the Sony Zeiss version.
91001
Wide - surprisingly as wide as my old main dive light a UK Xenon that has a 2 1/2 inch wide lens
465322
I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my 7D and got a 5D MKIII. I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my... » Read More I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my 7D and got a 5D MKIII. « Show Less
931353
It is just a little bit thinner (a few mm) but that's not a big deal. The main difference is that the 20 mm lens is better optically.
96399
I have both this 15-85mm lens, and the wonderful EF-S 10-22mm. Since getting the 15-85, I almost never use the 10-22, even though most of my photography is on the wide-angle side of normal. I recommend both lenses, but get the 15-85 first, and you may find, as I did, that it is very adequate all by itself. If you do need extreme wide-angle, however, by all means get the EF-S 10-22mm, which is excellent. Best, get both!
860958
I have the same setup, as with most applications, there will be slight vignetting when using the lens at 10mm, but that can be easily cropped. Really like my ND Set. Good luck! Richard
1371876
The cheaper lens is a 40-150mm, the more expensive is 14-150, allowing wide angle shots through to approx 10 x zoom. It minimises lens changeovers, there's a better chance of having the "right" lens on the camera at any time.
407627
you are better off w Cokin Z on 10-20 lens. Permits wide much better Than P Series holder