Wide angle lense

[Jack E]

Hey guys,

I am considering the purchase of a 10-22 wide angle lens for my EOS350D.

My aim is to be able to take nice panoramic / landscape shots on an upcoming overseas trip (I am off to see the Wallabies in THE World Cup:D )

Will the 10-22 allow me to "fit more in the picture" or will I just get a fish eye effect?

Cheers, Jack

[Wood Butcher]

(I am off to see the Wallabies in THE World Cup:D )

I know nothing about camera lenses, but I am extremely jealous!:p

[Jack E]

I'll send you a picture, if they work out:D

Cheers, Jack

[bitingmidge]

Here's a review of the canon10-22

http://kenrockwell.com/canon/1022.htm
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison-distortion.htm
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/correctinglensdistortion.htm

Distortion is going to happen, for landscape or architectural photography, you can work with it or correct it.

I prefer to use it to advantage, makes for great skies!

Don't use it for portraits, unless you are into big chested women and big nosed blokes!

Cheers,

P
:D

[Jack E]

Thanks for the links Peter.
A little disappointing though, had hoped to get away with a sigma or tamron but it seems the canon is the way to go.
Maybe the macro will have to wait.

Do you have any suggestions for a macro lens?

Cheers Jack

[munruben]

Wide angle lens will always cause some distortion to the picture but sometimes you need a wide angle to get the shot you want. You won't get a fish eye effect with the lens you speak of, only a fish eye lens will give you that but even the 22 mm lens will cause some noticeable distortion. The standard 50mm lens is the lens that sees things as similar to the human eye and gives you a normal looking image. i don't know if the same settings and numbers apply to digital cameras as the TTL SLR cameras that I always used but in general terms, the wider angle lens you use, the more distortion you will get. but sometimes you have to make sacrifices to achieve the results you want. There are others here who will have a better knowledge of digital cameras and will be able to help you more.Good luck.

[bitingmidge]

Do you have any suggestions for a macro lens?

Hopefully someone who knows something about macro photography will pipe in here!

I use my 18-200 tele with mixed success, but have some specific jobs I need done, so will be purchasing a 105 in the next few months. Some would argue that a 60 or thereabouts would be a better all round lens, but I have a standard 50mm and need a 1:1, and the 105 is effectively a 150 tele in 35mm terms so I'll like it!

Hmmm there's a lot of numbers there!

Check out the canon forums at dpreview.com, there'll be thousands of bits of conflicting advice there!

cheers,

P
:D

[clubbyr8]

Thanks for the links Peter.
A little disappointing though, had hoped to get away with a sigma or tamron but it seems the canon is the way to go.
Maybe the macro will have to wait.

Do you have any suggestions for a macro lens?

Cheers Jack

Jack,

Just seen this thread. The Canon 100mm 2.8 macro is a superb lens (see my thread called "New Lens"). It is razor sharp and provides superb "general" photographs. It is quite a heavy piece of glass but well worth the pain. One of the good features of this lens is that it uses internal focusing which means the lens barrel doesn't extend when you're focusing on your subject. This is very useful if you're attempting to take macro shots of bugs (less chance of spooking them). The 100mm focal length lets you get away with not having to get too close to your subject. The macro ratio is 1:1 therefore pictures are life size. The lens uses a USM motor and is silent (another good feature). I believe the lens retails for $999 but I paid $699 for mine. Best investment I have made.
This lens is consistently voted the best macro lens for Canon.

The 3rd party lenses by Tamron (90mm SP 2.8) and Sigma (105mm EX 2.8) are also superb lenses.

This site http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_list.php is a very useful site for reviews of lenses for Canon EOS cameras.

Bob

[woodbe]

Jack,

The 10-22 is a very good lens, I'm sure it will do the job for you. The other one to consider is the Sigma 12-24. I'm not sure what your photo history is, but these lenses are in the 35mm equivalent range of 16mm to 35mm. Think 'Wide to Ultra Wide'

The canon fisheye is a 15mm but even at 10mm, you won't get the fisheye effect on the 10-22, because fisheye has to be designed into the lens itself. You will get some distortion though, and especially if you take photos with a wide lens close to objects.

If it were me, I'd go down to a camera shop and try them out on your camera.

woodbe.