Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon 10-22 v. Nikon 12-24

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
January 15, 2005 5:15:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

My choice of dslr will be based solely on which system provides the
best WA zoom. I have read several reviews, but found none which
compare the two lenses. Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
but must order separate lens hood. Both offer same view angles
considering their 1.6 v. 1.5. Any opinions?? Thank you!

More about : canon nikon

January 15, 2005 5:15:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Both offer same view angles
> considering their 1.6 v. 1.5.

not really

10mm @ 1.6 = 16 mm
12mm @ 1.5 = 18 mm

22mm @ 1.6 = 35.2 mm
24mm @ 1.5 = 36 mm
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 10:57:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range of
Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
RebelD and the 20D. Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII or
1Ds mkII suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up a 10D as a back
up body. Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor camera, so you can
dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40 f4L.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"Marty" <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:l59iu0hdnioorrtpq4ive6vv7ep99v2r4a@4ax.com...
> My choice of dslr will be based solely on which system provides the
> best WA zoom. I have read several reviews, but found none which
> compare the two lenses. Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
> but must order separate lens hood. Both offer same view angles
> considering their 1.6 v. 1.5. Any opinions?? Thank you!

One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range of
Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
RebelD and the 20D. Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII
(1.3x) or 1Ds mkII (1.0x) suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up
a 10D as a back up body. Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor
camera, so you can dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40
f4L.
On the other hand, the Nikon will fit all of the Nikons, which all have 1.5x
sensors.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Related resources
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 11:53:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Marty <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:l59iu0hdnioorrtpq4ive6vv7ep99v2r4a@4ax.com:

> Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
> but must order separate lens hood.

Are you kidding?

Tell you what - send me a couple of hundred dollars, and I'll order a
twenty dollar lens hood for you. Sound like a deal?
January 16, 2005 1:33:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Chuck,

You are right. But close enough for me.

Marty

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:42:21 -0500, "Chuck" <nospammm@no_spam.com>
wrote:

>> Both offer same view angles
>> considering their 1.6 v. 1.5.
>
>not really
>
>10mm @ 1.6 = 16 mm
>12mm @ 1.5 = 18 mm
>
>22mm @ 1.6 = 35.2 mm
>24mm @ 1.5 = 36 mm
>
>
January 16, 2005 1:36:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric,

Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
you have any answers to those questions?

Marty

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 20:53:28 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Marty <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
>news:l59iu0hdnioorrtpq4ive6vv7ep99v2r4a@4ax.com:
>
>> Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
>> but must order separate lens hood.
>
>Are you kidding?
>
>Tell you what - send me a couple of hundred dollars, and I'll order a
>twenty dollar lens hood for you. Sound like a deal?
January 16, 2005 1:36:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Marty" <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com...
> Eric,
>
> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
> you have any answers to those questions?

yup, the Canon is sharper, has less distortion and is as fast as the
Nikkor...
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 1:36:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Chuck" <nospammm@no__spam.com> wrote in message
news:34tkm0F4fcifrU1@individual.net...
>
> "Marty" <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news:rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com...
>> Eric,
>>
>> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
>> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
>> you have any answers to those questions?
>
> yup, the Canon is sharper, has less distortion and is as fast as the
> Nikkor...
>
>
Do you have any tests that prove that statement? I don't believe it. I have
the Nikkor (the ENTIRE reason I chose the D100 over a year ago). It's a
stunning lens.

Tom
January 16, 2005 1:58:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thank you Chuck. Unless I hear otherwise, I will soon be ordering the
Canon lens and either the DR or 20D (depending on my finances at the
time). For what I want, the DR with hack should be good enough. Thank
you again for your input.


On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:48:57 -0500, "Chuck" <nospammm@no__spam.com>
wrote:

>
>"Marty" <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> a écrit dans le message de
>news:rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com...
>> Eric,
>>
>> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
>> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
>> you have any answers to those questions?
>
>yup, the Canon is sharper, has less distortion and is as fast as the
>Nikkor...
>
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 2:50:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Marty <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com:

> Eric,
>
> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
> you have any answers to those questions?

So you're not just interested in the lens hood any more, eh?

Good thinking.

> Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
> but must order separate lens hood.
January 16, 2005 11:11:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thank you all so far, especially Tom who actually has one of these two
lenses. And Skip, you make an excellent point ... although I can never
picture me having enough money for any body over $1,500. Does anyone
in this group actually have the Canon lens?

Marty

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 19:57:11 -0800, "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net>
wrote:

>One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range of
>Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
>RebelD and the 20D. Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII or
>1Ds mkII suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up a 10D as a back
>up body. Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor camera, so you can
>dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40 f4L.
>
>--
>Skip Middleton
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
>"Marty" <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:l59iu0hdnioorrtpq4ive6vv7ep99v2r4a@4ax.com...
>> My choice of dslr will be based solely on which system provides the
>> best WA zoom. I have read several reviews, but found none which
>> compare the two lenses. Canon is a couple of hundred dollars cheaper,
>> but must order separate lens hood. Both offer same view angles
>> considering their 1.6 v. 1.5. Any opinions?? Thank you!
>
>One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range of
>Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
>RebelD and the 20D. Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII
>(1.3x) or 1Ds mkII (1.0x) suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up
>a 10D as a back up body. Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor
>camera, so you can dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40
>f4L.
>On the other hand, the Nikon will fit all of the Nikons, which all have 1.5x
>sensors.
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 1:40:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I have a 10-22 F/3.5-4.5 USM. It is a delightful little lens, sharp,
contrasty, reasonably fast, fast AF; basically everything you could ask
for in a super wide lens.
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 7:14:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com>,
Marty <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Eric,
>
> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
> you have any answers to those questions?

There is another alternative, the Zuiko 11-22mm. slightly less wide but
F2.8 and 100% distortion free (automatically, with Olympus Studio
software). It focuses very fast and with full time manual override (like
all E system lenses). I have also used the Nikkor, on a D1x, and found
it to actually focus remarkably slow. (for a superwide) It's a good lens
though. Image quality is about the same I would say, but the Zuiko is
built better. (!) There are 2 bodies that will fit the Zuiko, the E1 and
the new, cheaper, E300. A Zuiko 7-14mm will be available from march, but
it's going to be expensive...

Lourens
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 9:03:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:

> One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range of
> Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
> RebelD and the 20D.

The 10-22 works on all current 1.6x Canon dSLRs, and it's seriously unlikely
Canon would release a 1.6x dSLR that it wouldn't work on. The 10-22's a lot
of fun*.

If you have enough money (and upper body strength) to afford a non-1.6x
Canon dSLR, you won't mind leaving the 10-22 on your 300D or 20D.

> Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII or
> 1Ds mkII suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up a 10D as a
back
> up body.

All that means is that the 300D makes a better backup body than a 10D.

> Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor camera, so you can
> dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40 f4L.

A lot of us already have the 17-40 and are using it as our normal lens while
praying for a "3D" with the 1Dsmk2 sensor.

*: http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/38599569/large
(Click original to see all the pixels.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 9:03:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J. Littleboy" <davidjl@gol.com> wrote in message
news:csdahp$85v$1@nnrp.gol.com...
>
> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> One point in favor of the Nikon, it is compatible with the entire range
>> of
>> Nikon digital SLRs, the Canon 10-22 EF-S will, at this time, only fit the
>> RebelD and the 20D.
>
> The 10-22 works on all current 1.6x Canon dSLRs, and it's seriously
> unlikely
> Canon would release a 1.6x dSLR that it wouldn't work on. The 10-22's a
> lot
> of fun*.
You mean both of them... ;-) True, the probability of Canon continuing the
EF-S mount is very strong. But, I, for one, when I upgrade from the 20D,
will probably go to either the 1D mkII or 1Ds mkII or their successors.
That being said, I'll probably hang onto the 20D as a back up. It's just
something to consider.
>
> If you have enough money (and upper body strength) to afford a non-1.6x
> Canon dSLR, you won't mind leaving the 10-22 on your 300D or 20D.
>
>> Not significant unless you decide that the 1D mkII or
>> 1Ds mkII suits your needs at some point, or want to pick up a 10D as a
> back
>> up body.
>
> All that means is that the 300D makes a better backup body than a 10D.
>
And a less capable one, currently more expensive.

>> Of course, the 1Ds mkII is a full frame sensor camera, so you can
>> dump your EF-S mount 10-22 and buy a 16-35 f2.8L or 17-40 f4L.
>
> A lot of us already have the 17-40 and are using it as our normal lens
> while
> praying for a "3D" with the 1Dsmk2 sensor.
>
> *: http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/38599569/large
> (Click original to see all the pixels.)
>
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan
>
>
>
All I'm trying to do is to point out the sometimes "onconsidered" negatives
of the EF-S mount.
Anonymous
January 16, 2005 10:30:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Lourens Smak" <smak@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:smak-8A75BF.16145016012005@news.wanadoo.nl...
> In article <rj6ju0h3hefpc8eiohn6gn68hjct24lb78@4ax.com>,
> Marty <ehasz@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Eric,
>>
>> Not kidding. No deal if the Nikkor is a sharper lens. No deal if the
>> Nikkor focuses faster. No deal if the Nikkor has less distortion. Do
>> you have any answers to those questions?
>
> There is another alternative, the Zuiko 11-22mm. slightly less wide but
> F2.8 and 100% distortion free (automatically, with Olympus Studio
> software). It focuses very fast and with full time manual override (like
> all E system lenses). I have also used the Nikkor, on a D1x, and found
> it to actually focus remarkably slow. (for a superwide) It's a good lens
> though. Image quality is about the same I would say, but the Zuiko is
> built better. (!) There are 2 bodies that will fit the Zuiko, the E1 and
> the new, cheaper, E300. A Zuiko 7-14mm will be available from march, but
> it's going to be expensive...
>
> Lourens

I'm one of the biggest OM fans in the world, but 22mm equivalent isn't
'slightly less wide' than 16mm or 18mm.

It's a HUGE difference.

And 5mp vs. 6 or 8.

Personally, the E series is too little, too late.

Tom
January 17, 2005 12:18:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 16 Jan 2005 10:40:40 -0800, MitchAlsup@aol.com wrote:

>I have a 10-22 F/3.5-4.5 USM. It is a delightful little lens, sharp,
>contrasty, reasonably fast, fast AF; basically everything you could ask
>for in a super wide lens.

Thank you. Any reason why I shouldn't use it on a dr (300) with the
russian hack? That would be the cheapest way to go for me. I really
cannot afford a D20 now.

Marty
Anonymous
January 17, 2005 8:32:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:03:40 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
<davidjl@gol.com> wrote:

>
>The 10-22 works on all current 1.6x Canon dSLRs, and it's seriously unlikely
>Canon would release a 1.6x dSLR that it wouldn't work on. The 10-22's a lot
>of fun*.
>
>If you have enough money (and upper body strength) to afford a non-1.6x
>Canon dSLR, you won't mind leaving the 10-22 on your 300D or 20D.

I think the thought in many folks minds is...given the speed at which
the technology is progressing and the prices are dropping, it might
not be long at all until a full-frame dSLR is available at a much more
affordable price. So if money is an issue, and you are buying for the
long term, then waiting a bit might make sense to some.

This from a person who just ordered his Canon 10-22m from B&H
yesterday.

;-)

-Chef Juke
"EVERYbody Eats When They Come To MY House!"
www.chefjuke.com
January 17, 2005 11:00:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Are you going to use your 10-22 on a DR or on a 20D? Either way, would
you kindly let us know how you like it after you use it for a few
days? Thanks.

Marty

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 05:32:55 -0800, Chef Juke <juke@NOTQUITEchef.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 18:03:40 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
><davidjl@gol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>The 10-22 works on all current 1.6x Canon dSLRs, and it's seriously unlikely
>>Canon would release a 1.6x dSLR that it wouldn't work on. The 10-22's a lot
>>of fun*.
>>
>>If you have enough money (and upper body strength) to afford a non-1.6x
>>Canon dSLR, you won't mind leaving the 10-22 on your 300D or 20D.
>
>I think the thought in many folks minds is...given the speed at which
>the technology is progressing and the prices are dropping, it might
>not be long at all until a full-frame dSLR is available at a much more
>affordable price. So if money is an issue, and you are buying for the
>long term, then waiting a bit might make sense to some.
>
>This from a person who just ordered his Canon 10-22m from B&H
>yesterday.
>
>;-)
>
>-Chef Juke
>"EVERYbody Eats When They Come To MY House!"
>www.chefjuke.com
!