1 used from £349.99

Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon

Canon 10 - 22 mm / F 3,5 - 4,5 EF-S USM 10 mm-Lens [Camera]

5.0 out of 5 stars 1 customer review

Available from these sellers.
1 used from £349.99
    This fits your .
  • Enter your model number above to make sure this fits.
  • EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
  • EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5

Special Offers and Product Promotions

  • Visit our Canon shop to see the full range of Canon products.

Product details

  • Product Dimensions: 9 x 8.4 x 8.4 cm ; 386 g
  • Boxed-product Weight: 612 g
  • Item model number: 9518A002
  • ASIN: B0002Y5WXE
  • Date first available at Amazon.co.uk: 16 May 2008
  • Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 411,207 in Electronics (See Top 100 in Electronics)

Product Description

An ultra wide-angle zoom lens with dynamic expressive capability for all EF-S mount EOS cameras; exceptionally small and lightweight for maximum mobility.Features-Super wide angle zoom for all EF-S mount bodies. -Superb image quality. -Lightweight and compact. -Focusing distance of just 24cm. -Fast near-silent USM AF. -Super Spectra coatings. -Circular aperture. -Optional exclusive lens hood. A new perspectiveWith its effective focal length range of approximately 16-35mm in 35mm format, the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is a remarkable lens with outstanding image quality that will take your photography into new dimensions and areas of dramatic expression. Beyond human perspectiveThe super-wide zoom not only gives you the freedom to get exactly what you want in the shot, it dramatically alters perspective to allow for dynamic expression. The lens allows you to get extremely close to subjects, exaggerating the difference in size between a near object and its background. Creative photographers can use this phenomenon to create excellent separation between subject and background for a strong sense of presence, or for a pan-focus effect with everything from foreground to background sharply in focus. Small, light and closeExceptionally light and compact for its focal length range, the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM also has an incredibly close minimum focusing distance of just 24cm. Fast focusA ring-type USM works in concert with the camera to provide super-fast, precision auto focusing and predictive tracking - with full manual override available at any time.Designed for digitalDesigned specifically for digital photography, the lens has specially shaped lens elements and Super Spectra coatings to suppress ghosting and flare, which can be caused by reflections off digital camera sensors. An exclusive optional lens hood can further reduce the incidence of flare.Background blurA circular aperture provides a pleasing background blur when shooting with a wide aperture; ideal for cre

What do customers buy after viewing this item?

Customer Questions & Answers

Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
See the customer review
Share your thoughts with other customers

Top Customer Reviews

Excellent quality. I just love this lens, it' almost "L" quality.I took a picture of my car, got it all in from little more than a foot away (30cms in new money)
Comment 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: HASH(0x98a09d98) out of 5 stars 395 reviews
1,015 of 1,058 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x926d4588) out of 5 stars The answer to the crop sensor problem. 20 Nov. 2006
By Jim Krupnik - Published on Amazon.com
My take on this lens is that it is an "L" quality optic in a fine, non "L" package. There is nothing else on the market to compete with it (nothing at all), and it produces supurb images. It isn't an f/2.8 lens, but it is close enough for most uses. The competition from Tamron is a full stop slower, not as sharp, and is awful in dim light compared to the Canon 10-22 lens (sorry, Tamron fans, but the Tamron lens isn't even playing in the same ballpark).

I use this lens on a 30D body, and I always keep it on hand if I'm doing any indoor, or tight group photography. It is the perfect solution to the perennial problem of not having enough room to capture all the kids at a birthday party in one shot because your back is up against a wall. This lens will just about get your toes into the picture at the widest setting, yet delivers tack sharp, colorful, and contrasty images. The auto focus is spot on, silent, and fast. It is a must have lens for the active amateur, or any pro using a 1.6 crop factor camera. You simply can't beat this lens with anything available on the market today.

That beng said, do not try to convince yourself that this will make a good "walkaround" lens. It isn't. Even at max length, it is far too short to live on your camera as a standard lens. You need this lens, even if you don't know it yet, but it should not be your first lens, as it will only be used 15 to 20 percent of the time. At those times, it's performance simply cannot be equaled by any other zoom lens on a 1.6 crop factor camera. You will be amazed by the quality of this lens. It rivals the performance of modern prime lenses, presents a bright viewfinder image, and delivers the goods in tight situations.

This is not a casual assessment, nor a Canon "feel good" moment on my part. I developed my first B&W contact prints in 1964, in my own darkroom at the age of 9 (my parents were concerned:)), and have been an avid photographer ever since. Small, medium, and large format cameras and lenses have passed through my hands over the years, and Canon has become my favorite small format brand. Still, Canon builds some trash lenses that should be avoided. The 10-22 USM is not one of them :).

Before you go out and buy this lens, you should already own the EF-S 17-55mm IS f/2.8 lens. That is the king of 1.6 crop factor standard lenses, and includes the awesome Canon IS feature. It will end up being mounted on your camera 80% of the time, and keep you smiling after every shoot. Get that lens first. Then, get the 10-22mm lens. Then, let your imagination run wild, and plan on serious telephoto lenses for the future. Trust me or not, the two lenses mentioned above will provide you with photographic tools that will astound you. Get them in your kit as soon as you can afford them.

A little warning about either lens.... Some here will argue the point, but with either lens, get a GOOD quality UV filter that is multi-coated on both sides, and built extra thin to avoid vignetting at wide lens settings. A good filter will cost a little less than one hundred Dollars, and can cost up to one hundred forty Dollars. The minimum brand would be Hoya Pro 1 multi coated filters, and the ante goes up from there.

Everything else is garbage, including the Canon "sharp cut" filter that costs less than fifty bucks. No kidding, no conjecture. If you use cheap filters, you will never see what your lens can really do. Ever. No doubt that many will respond with claims that their twenty Dollar filter works just fine, but they simply don't know any better, and have never used their expensive equipment to it's full potential. It's akin to a Chevy owner passing judgement on a Mercedes Benz. The Chevy might feel real good, but until you own the Mercedes, you just have no clue.

Bottom line.... Make sure that the quality of your filters exceed the quality of your lenses. Yes, at a hundred bucks a pop for a 77mm filter, it hurts, but you will never regret it. Also, Amazon does not stock lens hoods for all non L Canon lenses. The price is stupid high for those hoods, but they make a night and day difference in in picture quality. Whenever you order a non L Canon lens, find a web seller who has the hood in stock, and get it right now. Again, you will never regret owning it.

That's it for my review/rant. Buy this lens. Buy the 17-55 IS f/2,8 first. Buy the lens hoods for both. Toss any "kit" lenses that came with the camera in the trash bin (where they belong), and be very happy.
302 of 323 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x90fe1e10) out of 5 stars The best lens I own 30 Mar. 2005
By M. A. Filippelli - Published on Amazon.com
I have had this lens for several months now and let me start out by saying WOW. I looked at the lens in the store along with the Sigma 12-24 and I was in total awe of what I saw though the view finder with the Canon 10-22. This is an ultra wide angle lens that is incredible. I went home and thought about where I would use this lens and determined that I would use it quite a bit. I went ahead and bought the lens and I continue to be more impressed with it every time I use it. I have used the lens for both close-up (which can give you some very interesting distortion shots)and wide angle shots with great success.

The 10-22mm is equivalent to 16-35mm field of view using a canon 20D which is not a full frame sensor. With a minimum focal distance of .24m (about 9.5 inches) you can get very close to objects and still get alot of focal width in the photo. There is incredible clarity in the lens. The photos I have taken are very clear with only a slight hint of softening at the corners at 10mm; everything else is sharp after that. There is a little barrel distortion at 10mm but everything else up to 22mm is nice. I have not gotten any light flare in my photos. The Ultrasonic motor is very quiet. The depth of field is outstanding. A slim UV filter helps prevent some slight vignetting at 10mm. With a maximum aperture that ranges from f/3.5 to f/4.5, the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens is a medium speed lens. I would recommend using a tripod if you are at all unsure about your ability to hold the camera still for action shots with this lens. The lens it's self is fairly light weight. If you are going to use filters the lens requires 77mm.

The lens can produce some interesting distortion shots if you are taking close-ups and are not perpendicular to the object. For close-up shots with out distortion it is best to be perpendicular to the object.

Inside the lens housing there are three aspherical lens elements and a Super UD element that produce clear vibrant shots. The lens it's self sturdily built and comfortable to handle.

UPDATE 7/30/2011: I still love this lens. It functions every bit as well as it did the day I got it.
634 of 685 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x90807a80) out of 5 stars Very good lens, but expensive 28 Mar. 2005
By Svend - Published on Amazon.com
I am very impressed with this lens. I didn't realize just how wide-angle this lens was. At 10mm, I can stand just a few feet in front of a 13-story building, and get the whole thing in the picture, from the entrance to the top of the building.

As with all very-wide lenses, you have to be careful that you don't have people at the edges of the frame or too close to the lens, or they will appear very distorted when taking pictures at 10mm. Also note that a wide angle lens is not easy to use at first to create compelling images, as it's very easy to include too much clutter in your compositions.

- optical quality is excellent (deserves an "L" lens designation)
- uses the higher quality ring-type USM focusing
- minimum focusing distance is very close
- surprisingly lightweight
- very flare-resistant even without hood
- the only option for EOS digital cameras (Rebel, Rebel XT, 20D) to get true wide angle shots due to the smaller APS-C sensor in those cameras.

- It's expensive! But at least it is cheaper than a year ago.
- The lens is a little soft in the corners at 10mm, but is very sharp at 12mm and up.
- Canon has not formally committed to how long they will continue to make cameras and lenses using the EF-S system.
- The lens currently only works on the lower-end dSLR cameras -- the 10D, 1D, 1Ds, and 5D cameras cannot use this lens.
- The hood is not included with this lens, but it's such as ugly hood and the lens doesn't have flare problems, so I don't really think it is necessary anyway.

In 5 years when you upgrade your camera, there is a possibility that it will not support this lens. This depends on what direction Canon goes in making camera sensors:
1) continue to make cameras that use the smaller APS-C sensor, and keep improving its density to support more and more resolution. This will help keep the dSLR cameras smaller and lighter, and will necessitate making EF-S lenses the standard.
2) make the sensors match the size of a frame of 35mm film. And at the same time increase the density to yield even more resolution. Right now sensors this big are very expensive to produce.

I now think that #2 is more likely to happen. All the other lenses out there are built for a 35mm-film-sized sensor, and now that Canon has released another full-frame camera (5D) at a lower price, I'm betting that in another few years the APS-C sensor will be practically obsolete. A 5D body and 16-35 or 17-40 lens will give you better results than a 20D with this lens, but the difference in price between the two setups is a few thousand dollars right now.

The 10-22 is an excellent lens, but it will probably not hold its value as well as the Canon 16-35 and 17-40 lenses. A slightly more affordable alternative is the Sigma 10-20mm, which sounds like it nearly equals the optical quality of this lens.
78 of 85 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x90ac4534) out of 5 stars A lens worth buying a digital slr for 2 Sept. 2005
By Todd Salerno - Published on Amazon.com
Verified Purchase
I've been more or less addicted to wide angle photography for the last 20 years or thereabouts. Unfortunately, ultra wide angle shooters have been left out of reasonably accessible digital slr photography until very recently. Now there are several viable name brand options available, namely the Canon 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 reviewed here, the Nikon 12-24mm f4, and the Zuiko 7-14mm f4. Because of the 3 different crop factors involved, these lenses end up being pretty close in (35mm equivalent) effective range; 16-35 for the Canon, 18-36 for the Nikon, and 14-28 for the Olympus. Many will caution against purchasing these lenses since they cannot cover the full frame 24x36 format, and cannot even be mounted on a regular body. In the Olympus' case, it doesn't matter since the company has staked its fortunes on the smaller 4/3rds sensor format, and has opened it up to other manufacturers such as Fuji and Panasonic. With the Nikon and Canon, you are taking a leap of faith that the companies will continue to produce 1.5 and 1.6 crop factor sensors into the future so that you will be able to take your crop-only lenses to upgraded digital bodies down the line. To my mind, Olympus has already demonstrated the desirable technical characteristics of a smaller sensor format, so there is good reason to believe that smaller than full frame sensors are here to stay. By extending the glass beyond the mount and into the body, and/or covering a smaller circle, Canon and Nikon are providing those same technical benefits to users of their smaller sensor cameras, namely sharp, extra wide angle in a compact package. Besides which, I'm much more concerned with the photos I couldn't take if I stayed away from the product, than I am with its unknown future upgrade path.

While the Olympus lens and 4/3rds system was intriguing, I felt that the 7-14mm wasn't worth more than double the price of the Canon for 2 extra mm at the wide end. It's also double the weight - making it impractical for use as an everyday lens, and negating the advantages of the E-1 body. So, I was pretty much down to the Canon or the Nikon (or the always available Waitsomemore).

At this point, I should say I'm platform agnostic. In the 80's I happily used Minolta equipment. In the 90's I bought some Nikon gear to use their 15mm prime lens. Basically, if it suits my purposes, I don't care what the label is.

Back to the lenses. The Nikon is more expensive and less wide, but it does have the continuous maximum apeture throughout the range. The Canon is wider, a tad lighter, and a tiny amount faster at the wide end. Both appear to be excellent choices, but I could not consider them independently of the cameras they would be mated to. Since I did not already own a digital body, it also came down to a decision between the Canon 20d & Nikon D70s. Here, the Canon wins for me on quality of sensor and a host of other details.

In practice, the lens is a joy to use. It's sharp. The zoom allows it to be as wide as you need it, which is an improvement over my previous favorite Minolta 20mm 2.8, though it does lack the depth of field scales which the Minolta has. The zoom also allows for keeping the lens mounted without switching as often, and that's important for keeping out dust. It's a very solidly built, quality instrument. Focus is fast if you're into that sort of thing, and nearly silent with the ultrasonic motor. The lens does not extend in length for zooming or focusing, though the front elements do move slightly inside the barrel. Mated to the 20d it's a tool that exceeds my previous film cameras in just about every way imaginable. I'm finally free to make the ultrawide photos that I want to make in the digital domain and the initial results have been outstanding.

If you're into ultrawide and want to go digital, the 20d with 10-22 is a fantastic setup. If you've already gone digital and want to try wide angle, (assuming your camera can use ef-s lenses) this is a true bargain - you get a 16mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm all rolled into one. It makes me positively giddy. Thank you, Canon!
36 of 37 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x926d4774) out of 5 stars An excellent but expensive ultrawide zoom 12 May 2009
By Gwac - Published on Amazon.com
(4.5 of 5 stars)

This was my third lens purchase, after getting the kit lens with my Rebel XS and the 50mm f/1.8. Why did I choose this lens? Well for one, I was suffering from cheap lens syndrome. While I enjoyed the results I was getting from my other lenses, they weren't much fun to work with because of the cheap build quality. More importantly perhaps, I was finding myself at 18mm on my kit lens more than 50% of the time. While I was generally happy with those results, I was disappointed by the barrel distortion, CAs and flare, and wanted something wider that would give me more flexibility.

I read many reviews of the 10-22mm, as well as the Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and 11-16mm f/2.8. All were received pretty positively. I didn't consider Sigma or Tamron options because of apparent quality control issues. So why did I pick this one?

1) Focal length/zoom range: As far as focal lengths were concerned, I wanted something that would give me a fair amount of flexibility, since I'm not too keen on switching lenses frequently. At the wide end, it really does help to have a zoom. The 10mm (16mm equiv) setting is pretty extreme and can be useful, but often the intermediate focal lengths (12-17mm) are more appropriate. Furthermore, at 22mm the resulting perspective could be described as "wide-normal" - things still appear pretty natural. Therefore, you get a lens that dabbles with extreme perspective on the wide end while offering a fairly normal perspective on the long end.

Those who are buying the lens purely for the widest setting may be more attracted to the Tokina 11-16, as it gives you nearly an extra stop in maximum aperture and is apparently a bit sharper than the Canon.

2) Distortion: Some have commented that they don't use the 10-16mm range as much because of distortion. I imagine these are the same people who are using the lens as a substitute for backing up. In fact, the Canon offers the lowest amount of optical (barrel) distortion in its class - much smaller than most standard zooms at their widest setting. It is trivial to correct in post-processing. Therefore, I can only assume that the complaints are about the perspective distortion, which is the result of using the ultra-wide focal lengths. This is the whole point of an ultrawide lens!! If you don't want perspective distortion, back up and zoom in! Or if you're looking for parallel lines buy a full frame camera and the $2500 tilt-shift 17mm lens. Problem solved.

3) Handling of flare: This is the single characteristic of this lens that I appreciate the most. Based on samples I've seen of the Tokinas and other 3rd party lenses, the Canon is the hands down winner on managing flare. With this lens it is possible to have the sun directly inside or just outside the frame with very little consequence to the final image. Even when you do manage to get flare in the frame, it is fairly minimal and not very unsightly. This is a very desireable characteristic of an ultrawide lens, since lots of light sources will find their way into your huge field of view. I find myself shooting into the sun even more than I normally would because of it. Another benefit of this characteristic is that there is little incentive to buy or use the bulky lens hood.

4) Chromatic Aberrations: Compared to the Tokinas, this lens has minimal CAs at the wide end that many will be able to live with in their JPEGs. If you want to get rid of them, it is again trivial to do by shooting RAW and post-processing.

5) Light weight: Despite being about the same size, the Canon is lighter compared to the Tokinas (13 oz. vs. 20 oz.). I feel that it is ideally balanced on my small Rebel XS, and therefore appreciate the weight advantage.

6) Colors: Is it just me or does this lens render beautifully saturated colors? Wonderful green trees and gorgeous blue skies.


1) Price: The Canon is significantly more expensive than 3rd party alternatives, which is not unusual. Maybe more annoying, though, is that it is priced similarly to the full-frame equivalent, the 17-40mm L. Basically you're paying the same price for a lens with less glass and poorer build quality (though the build is not bad). As with the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 Canon has put "L" glass in a consumer body and charges "L" prices because there's no in-house competition. On the bright side, compared to the Nikon equivalents (12-24mm and 10-24mm), which are around $900, this is cheap.

I got this lens during rebate season, but I would have hesitated to spend more than $700 on it with the good 3rd party alternatives available.

2) Sharpness: I must have had unreasonably high expectations in terms of sharpness. The lens produces excellent micro-contrast at normal viewing sizes (very good for all but the largest prints). However, looking at the images at full size on your monitor will reveal somewhat inferior pixel level detail. The results do respond pretty well to sharpening, though. Sounds like the Tokina 11-16 might be a little better in terms of pixel-level detail, but I wouldn't expect it to be too noticeable. For the best sharpness across the frame I try to keep the aperture between f/5.6 and f/8, and never smaller than f/11. Larger than f/5.6 the center is fine but the edges degrade. The only serious complaint is the extreme corners, but this is typical in almost all wide-angle lenses. In any case, I am of the opinion that sharpness is an over-emphasized lens characteristic. I will take the contrast, handling of flare, bokeh and low distortion of this lens over greater sharpness any day.

3) Vignetting: This is most noticeable wide open at 10mm, but again is fairly easily corrected. Not a big deal to me.

4) Not really a complaint, but a warning: The lens isn't very compatible with the built-in flash except at the longest focal lengths. A lens shadow appears at shorter focal lengths, and the flash is unevenly distributed anyway so the effect is pretty undesirable. Better keep the kit lens around when you want to use flash.

Overall, I'm very happy with this lens. It has more or less displaced my kit lens, as I use my 50mm f/1.8 for any short tele needs. I should note, however, that dealing with wide focal lengths requires a lot more skill as a photographer in almost every respect: composition, selection of aperture, focusing, and metering. This is not a point-and-shoot lens. It is tempting to use the 10mm setting a lot but you will find with time that it does not suit all subjects equally well - Some of my favorite photos were taken at intermediate focal lengths, where the IQ of the lens really shines.

This is a great photographic tool that will challenge you to be more creative. You will get the best results with this lens when you are thinking outside the box. In fact, some of my favorite photos from this lens are when I use it for close-ups. It's not by any means a macro lens, but the perspective distortion as well as the large apparent depth of field can make for some nice close-up shots with the right background. Regardless of the brand, I whole-heartedly recommend a wide-angle zoom to those who enjoy capturing big scenes or getting close to their subjects. It's challenging to use but fun and rewarding.
Were these reviews helpful? Let us know

Look for similar items by category