LensTip.com

Lenses

There are 1688 lenses in our database and 3177 owners opinions.

You can also
compare lenses side-by-side

Search by:

Canon EF-S 10-22 mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Pictures:
Specifications:
Manufacturer Canon
Model EF-S 10-22 mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Lens style Wide angle zoom
Focal length 10 - 22 mm
Maximum aperture f/3.5 - 4.5
Angle of view 107.3 - 63.3 o
Closest focusing distance 0.24 m
Maximum magnification 1:5.88
Minimum aperture 22
Number of diaphragm blades 6
Auto focus type AF USM
Lens Construction 13 elements / 10 groups
Filter diameter 77 mm
Macro No
Available mounts Canon EF-S
Dimensions 83.5 x 89.8 mm
Weight 385 g
Additional information Marketed November 2004
Average rating (27 owners reviews)
Build quality
Optical quality
Value for money

Overall

3.59 Average
Owners reviews (27)
  1. PhotoMex
    PhotoMex 1 April 2015, 23:37
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 81.47.x.x
    Owner since: 6 years
    Price:
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Front/back focus, border sharpness, not recommended at all for IR.

    Pros: Lightweight, low distortion, relatively fast, wide zoom range, fast AF.

    Summary: Used to be my favorite lens before I switched to full frame. Good value for money.

  2. JaglanBeta
    JaglanBeta 15 January 2014, 22:36
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 95.148.x.x
    Owner since: 3 years
    Price: £630
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Price (though it has dropped below £500 recently so its less of an issue now). Not particularly sharp, even in the centre. More chromatic abberation than I expected at the price.

    Pros: Rectilinear with excellent distortion control, even at 10mm. Light and compact. Decent but not exceptional build quality. DPP lens profile completely eliminates

    Summary: The superb distortion control means this can be a rewarding lens to use. However the sharpness has been a major disappointment for me. UWA lenses often have the foreground to the edge of the image where the lens is weakest, but even centre resolution isn't on a par with the price bracket. Canon's DPP lens profile is its saving grace, CA can be totally eliminated, and the apparent sharpness is massively improved with it too (and without artifacts, but the noise does get a bit worse). Lenstip's old review rated it's resolution as higher than the 17-55, and approaching the EF85 f1.8. I have the 17-55, and the 10-22 is much softer unless you use DPP's lens profile. It seems implausible that a UWA zoom can really match that short telephoto prime, so maybe its time for a re-test from Lenstip?

  3. ronald
    ronald 26 December 2013, 18:01
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 81.253.x.x
    Owner since: 4 years
    Price: 500
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Noo real cons

    Pros: Very good pictures on wide angle . Build is hihh quality. A must have for landscape and architecture

    Summary: One of my favourits

  4. davidg2020
    davidg2020 1 December 2013, 11:44
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 101.166.x.x
    Owner since: 8 years
    Price:
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: Expensive for a non-L lens

    Pros: Very good image quality (I find)

    Summary: I'm surprised be the variations in reviews shown here. I think it says more about Canon's quality control than the quality of this lens (at least based on my sample). I've been more than happy with the results of my shooting with this lens. For the price and overall quality it should be an L series lens - but that will never be because it's EF-S.

  5. Jan_c
    Jan_c 25 November 2013, 13:16
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 88.101.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price:
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Price, lens hood not included.

    Pros: Superb image quality, sharpness, colours, flare resistance.

    Summary: An excellent lens for APS sensors. Best for landscapes.

  6. Mac
    Mac 6 November 2013, 17:38
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 65.92.x.x
    Owner since: 5 years
    Price: $770
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: Lens hood not included (really, Canon!). Would prefer weather sealing, range to 24mm. Bulky to store with the lens hood. In other words, no deal-breaking complaints.

    Pros: Stunning image quality, much better than the 16-35mm 2.8 L II which I bought at the same time (I still shoot film). Little if any CA, almost never flares nor ghosts. Very good in infrared, although the edges are slightly smeared at the widest settings. Again, trumps the FF L equivalent from Canon.

    Summary: One of my favorite lenses, period. For all its strengths I wouldn't change a hair. This lens will keep me in APS-C: full frame doesn't have a zoom this good.

  7. andyb
    andyb 4 March 2013, 06:30
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 92.18.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price:
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Colour rendition is quite 'pastelly', especially with blues, not great for a wide angle where you are almost always going to want sky in the frame .... Colour, for an L lens, is a little weak in general. Chromatic abberation can rear its ugly little head on occasion. Build quality is, again, for an L lens, poor, having a light, plasticky feel no better than a standard kit lens.

    Pros: The lens is otherwise quite well behaved and image quality, whilst not fantastic, presents no issues in the field. Does its job well.

    Summary: Whilst the lens does its job perfectly well (used with a 7D) the kind of qualities you would expect with an L lens are simply not there. Build quality is the biggest let down. You expect L lenses to excel. This merely does the job expected from it. The sigma version does a very similar job at a lower price

  8. birdshot
    birdshot 28 February 2013, 15:52
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 75.65.x.x
    Owner since: 1 month
    Price: $690
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Plastic feel, not sharp at any focal length, obvious decentering, poor quality control, exorbitant pricing.

    Pros: I was able to return it for full refund.

    Summary: I have been both a professional and amateur photographer for over 40 years so I've owned a lot of equipment. I'm a pretty fair judge of lens performance and I tend to give equipment makers a lot of credit for their work. It pains me to write this review since I've been a Canon user for about 14 years and I've always had the utmost respect for the company and their products. I'm sure I received a defective lens since decentering was obvious and there was no aperture or focal length at which the images were even close to being sharp. (Is this to be expected of quality control these days?) Initially, I intended to exchange it for another copy of the same lens. But, the more I handled it, the build quality of this lens completely turned me off. It's priced about the same as the 17-40L but shares no build characteristic whatsoever with any L-series lens. It's not even as well made as many of my old lower priced EF consumer zooms. It is flimsy-made and seems highly fragile--about the same build quality as the cheap 18-55 kit zooms I own but do not use. It would be overpriced at half what I paid for it. I returned it immediately for a refund.

  9. Bagatta
    Bagatta 15 January 2013, 11:14
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 217.148.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price: 770€
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: Mi sembra poco nitido confrontato ad altre ottiche con lunghezza focale simile.

    Pros: Leggero e divertente.

    Summary: Consigliato

  10. David
    David 27 August 2012, 09:43
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 202.137.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price:
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Build quality from light plastic and feel cranky

    Pros: Superb quality of lens even I compared with 17-40 F4L picture output are very sharp. The wide range 10mm are the most often use. I never use another range of zoom except 10mm. I can capture image without using viewfinder from camera.

    Summary: Satisfied

  11. Choque
    Choque 26 August 2012, 20:14
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 60.48.x.x
    Owner since: 1 month
    Price:
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: pricey, no lens hood

    Pros: excellent IQ, fast & accurate AF, lightweight

    Summary: highly recommended

  12. Crepello
    Crepello 30 May 2012, 01:19
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 90.216.x.x
    Owner since: 1 month
    Price: $850
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Complete lack of sharpness away from centre, at apertures at least below f11. The cost - my kit lens gives better quality images.

    Pros: Wide angle.

    Summary: Poor image quality and the price!!

  13. Rob
    Rob 15 February 2012, 15:22
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 82.95.x.x
    Owner since: 6 months
    Price: 670 Euro
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: Terribele amount of Chromatic Abberation in corners and overall unusuable corners due to total lack of sharpness even at F8 - F11. I've returned my copy to Canon and am waiting for their verdict. Used on Canon 60D. It could be that this lens simply isn't good enough for 19 mexapixels. I've owned a Nikon 12-24 which was much better in every aspect!

    Pros: lightweight, flare resistance, nice sunstar

    Summary: Avoid this lens at all costs and go for the Tokina 11-16 which is beter at alomst al points except flare resistance

  14. wmaldito
    wmaldito 10 February 2012, 19:10
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 79.147.x.x
    Owner since: 5 years
    Price: 700
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Parasol not included and of enormous size. High price.

    Pros: Low distortion, good construction, pity not creating constant width. Good saturation and color, fast, quiet, and effective AF (EOS 20 d and 50D).

    Summary: Indispensable for landscape. Highly recommended.

  15. Amateur666
    Amateur666 4 February 2012, 17:39
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 91.155.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price: too much
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Too expensive for what it is. Too dim (f/2.8 would be a nice starting point for a zoom). Not nearly as sharp as Tokina 11-16.

    Pros: Lightweight. Fast and accurate AF though.

    Summary: Mediocre UWA for crop sensor cameras.

  16. gratius
    gratius 30 November 2011, 13:48
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 201.15.x.x
    Owner since: 5 years
    Price:
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: no cons

    Pros: for a wide zoom: excelent!

    Summary: used for VR and arquitecture

  17. Bioibon
    Bioibon 9 March 2011, 17:16
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 150.241.x.x
    Owner since: 3 years
    Price: 650 euro
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Some CA. A little pricey.

    Pros: Small, light, great colors, little distortion for a WA lens. Good sharpness for a WA zoom lens.

    Summary: Good WA lens with high quality glass.

  18. kckleong
    kckleong 9 February 2011, 04:33
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 118.208.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price: 750
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: Terrible chromatic aberration and edge sharpness, even for such a short length - the lack of sharpness was visible anywhere off centre (not even mentioning the corners) on a postcard offset print! Terrible build quality: the lens broke in half when dropped 10 inches in a padded case and was refused a warranty repair by Canon Australia. Very expensive. No lens hood.

    Pros: Very wide at the short end and extends to almost a "normal" length i.e. 35-50mm film. It is ideally suited for my dramatic close-up and wide shooting style. Fast autofocus.

    Summary: I was very disappointed to have such poor performance for such a well-reviewed lens - so much so that I thought I may have a faulty lens. However, Canon Australia have confirmed, when it was repaired, that there was no fault. This lens was so expensive and problematic that I have changed systems!

  19. tomK
    tomK 11 January 2011, 04:55
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 72.19.x.x
    Owner since: 4 years
    Price: 650
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: f 4.5 on the long end makes AF hunt in low light

    Pros: sharp, fast AF, smooth zoom, low distortion

    Summary: one of Canon's best - skip the lens hood as it's silly looking and the 10-22 is very flair resistant

  20. Roberto Orrù
    Roberto Orrù 23 December 2010, 08:40
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 201.228.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price: $ 700
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: lack of a lens hood. this is an "L". I don't care Canon didn't name it like that. So why they don't think to give us an hood?

    Pros: everything. Great lens indeed! Very sharp and well corrected. Great colors. Happy to be able to avoid to shoot at f 8 in order to get a great picture. I own a 50d, which is quite sensitive to little apertures, and what I get shooting at f4-5,6 totally satisfy me.

    Summary: Buy it!

  21. JD
    JD 19 October 2010, 01:38
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 203.158.x.x
    Owner since: 3 years
    Price: About AU $
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: Corner fringing, no hood, layout of focus and zoom rings different from other Canon zooms

    Pros: Very wide, rectilinear, good colours, light weight, great performance at f/8.

    Summary: Spectacular performance at f/8, whatever the focal length. If someone had told me 20 years ago I'd be using a lens like this I would have laughed at them. A few corner CAs but very correctable in Ps.

  22. gooser-looser
    gooser-looser 10 October 2010, 03:29
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 80.174.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price: 640
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: bit expensive, some CAīs, lenshood missing

    Pros: strong resolution (the corners are a bit more week), nearly without distortion, nearly without light falloff, easy to handle, good design and of course 10mm, which is really greaaaat, nice colours

    Summary: reading the "Mr. goose" so I think the guy was really drunk or bought a rippoff-copy - all is nonesense, this is a really great lens, a bit expensive, but the allround-quality do justify the prize. Its a great, very wide lens, get one for the 7 D, 60,50,40 D!

  23. Goose
    Goose 7 October 2010, 07:03
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 76.126.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price: 700
    User profile: Professional

    Cons: dull colors, significant CA

    Pros: small size

    Summary: not worth the money

  24. Nikonicus
    Nikonicus 1 October 2010, 19:20
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 80.4.x.x
    Owner since: 2 years
    Price: $600
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: The usual: no lens hood. Filters are expensive at this size.

    Pros: Very sharp and not a great deal of distortion, even at the wide end if you keep the lens on centre to subject. This lens excels in keeping CAs down to a minimum and in providing sharp, contrasty results throughout its range. Smooth focus action, very good build quality.

    Summary: A little pricey but highly recommended if you want ultra-wide. That said, I find I do not use this lens as much as I thought I would as I find the more natural perspective at 17mm (27mm 35mm equivalent) onwards best for landscapes etc. But if you want wide for interiors and special effects this lens is essential. For the money this is a 5 star quality lens.

  25. Rainer-lensreporter
    Rainer-lensreporter 26 September 2010, 14:14
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 80.174.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price: 525
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: no lenshood!!! normal but stabil construction, some CAīs, corner-rendition sometimes a bit week (f3.5-5.6) but thatīs quiete normal for UWA, price for a new one

    Pros: Very sharp (in the center may be the best UWA on the market, only the Tokina 11-16 come close), few vignetting (from f5.6), very few corner-distorsion, colour-rendition is similar to L-lenses, light-wight, easy tu use

    Summary: Optics are really brilliant (always knowing whats possible with an UWA), construction is average but solid. The negative point: Price for a new one and what happens with the lenshood??? (moneychunker from Canon....)

  26. Plasma
    Plasma 14 March 2010, 17:44
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 95.222.x.x
    Owner since: 3 months
    Price: 650 Euro
    User profile: Amateur

    Cons: Little soft even when stopped down in darker situations; some weaknesses at short end (e.g. strong vignetting); some CAs; not always reliable AF on my 40D. Tubus slightly whobbling, but fortunately not extending too much; lens hood very large and expensive

    Pros: Fast AF; more reliable in sunlight, then also very sharp. Very useful range. Build quality ok.

    Summary: A still good (good-weather) lens, even if a little expensive.

  27. Dajon
    Dajon 12 December 2009, 05:50
    Build quality
    Optical quality
    Value for money

    Overall

    IP 70.66.x.x
    Owner since: 1 year
    Price: 850
    User profile: Semipro

    Cons: Lens hood too big. Corners alittle soft wide open. Expensive.

    Pros: Very sharp once stopped down. Well made. Fast AF

    Summary: An excellent lens for APS sensors -light weight and smooth operation.

Add your opinion

Build quality 0 1 2 3 4 5
Optical quality 0 1 2 3 4 5
Value for money 0 1 2 3 4 5