36 of 42 people found the following review helpful
Poor resolution disappoints,
This review is from: Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens (Camera)
I'd heard great things about this lens, and having used the Tokina 11-16mm before, in addition to a Rokinon 8mm fisheye, I was interested to see how this lens would measure up.
Unfortunately I've not been too impressed for the following reasons:
1) Distortion is poorly controlled, particularly at the wider end. I'd go as far as to say that the Rokinon performs better at 8mm than the Canon does at 10mm - then again, the Rokinon is a prime.
2) Chromatic aberration is on the verge of being unacceptable.
3) Resolution - absolutely awful towards the edges, and not particularly impressive in the center (and I don't mean the extreme edges - we're talking mid-way to the center here). This surprised me the most, and I have to say that the Canon was some way off the Tokina in this respect (although that lens has its own flaws). Personally I wouldn't entertain the idea of a large print if shooting at the wider end of the scale, as the results are unlikely to impress. Unfortunately the problem doesn't seem to improve until you drop the aperture to f8, but even then the results aren't very impressive. If you require speed then I'd advise that you shoot at f8.0 or greater, and instead increase your ISO (removing noise is a lot easier than removing mush!).
4) Autofocus - on the whole I tend to focus manually when shooting with a wide lens, but on some occasions the AF has let me down - you know when you point your camera at a scene which contains no objects closer than 20 meters and it selects a focus of 0.5m that something is amiss! Still, this isn't a common occurrence, and the AF is far better than that of the Tokina.
It's possible that I've received a poor copy of the lens, but I have to say that for the money I do feel rather disappointed, particularly when it comes to resolution, which falls well short of the mark.
I realise that this may not be a popular review given the almost fanatical following that this lens enjoys, but I feel obliged to provide an honest appraisal based on the money spent and my experience with other wide lenses.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-7 of 7 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 28 Mar 2013 22:44:43 GMT
A. Turner says:
Thanks for posting this. I also had real problems with resolution and sharpness and got slated by some people for writing an honest account. How did you find the Tokina 11-16 mm?
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Apr 2013 19:02:21 BDT
The problem with the Tokina was that the autofocus didn't really work at all - the results were generally random, although on the whole it tended to focus on a point less than 1m from the sensor, irrespective of what I was pointing at. In terms of image quality however, it was very good on the whole - definitely far better than the Canon at 11mm. In fact, I'd say that it was as good at f2.8 as my Canon is at f7.1, if not better.
It's not as versatile a lens though, and the extra 1mm at the wide end can give the Canon the edge under certain circumstances.
Ultimately the market is still waiting for the killer wide angle lens, and I suspect that if anybody delivers a true contender, it's likely to be Samyang / Rokinon.
Posted on 12 May 2014 14:44:07 BDT
T. Hammond says:
I have to agree with this review, I have just used this lens and have found the same.
Posted on 30 Oct 2014 09:05:33 GMT
This review is also posted for the Canon 10-22mm lens. Does the reviewer have both lenses?????
In reply to an earlier post on 30 Oct 2014 09:40:31 GMT
A. Turner says:
Probably not. Amazon have really messed up here. They have now decided to pool all reviews for the 10-18 and the 10-22 together. There is no way anybody can tell if a review is for one, the other, or both!!
Posted on 9 Nov 2015 22:21:59 GMT
I note that like far too many Amazon reviews, this is posted against a different product (in this case the 10-18mm STM which is a completely different lens). Thanks for the review Richard (which matches comments about the old 10-22 lens that I've seen elsewhere), but no thanks to Amazon for posting misleading negative reviews against good products!!!
In reply to an earlier post on 5 Feb 2016 18:54:55 GMT
freewheeling frankie says:
While the seemingly random decision to pool these two not very similar products on the same page and the resultant mixing up of their reviews is incredibly annoying - please stop doing this, Amazon - you CAN tell which product the review refers to because it says so at the top of the review. You can also filter the reviews for "style name" and therefore see only the ones for the product you're interested in.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›