New lens time... advice?

440Hz

hey all!

I have decided to treat myself to a new lens to see if I can motivate myself a bit! Problem is I want two very different lenses and can't pick between them, so Im after some advice.

It's either going to be:
* Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM
* Canon EF-S 10-22mm 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM

Right, so I want a WA, really badly. Have taken a load of shots lately that would have been great shots with a WA. (Like http://www.flickr.com/photos/click_click/562059433/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/click_click/528176207/)

But... I dont have any lens with a decent focal length, so I really want the 17-55 as well!! Every week Im at a gig thinking I wish I had a good low-light lens! Thing is I already have the 17-85 IS f/4, which was my first lens and I love it... but would two in the same range be total overkill... even though they do very different jobs? Other thing is I have two IS lenses already, and I love them. I have a "bionic arm" and the extra help with the shake is very valuable to me!

So thats the info and the choices! Help!!

ps: Before anyone mentions the EFS issue, I wont be going FF at any stage in the future due to my gammy arm, the FF bodies are just TOO heavy!!

5uspect

Thats a tough choice. I'm still stuck in kit lens land and I find the 18-55 just wide enough to allow some half decent stitching jobs in PS for wide angle stuff. So I'd go with the 17-55 here as something of a compromise.

rymus

Sigma 10-20

440Hz

rymus wrote:

Sigma 10-20

I've used it alot, and I like it. But something I have noticed with that lens is that alot of people LOVE it when they first get it and then very quickly go off it! The Canon has come down in price and isnt THAT much more these days. :S .. maybe

rymus

so... by that reasoning... why wouldnt someone that buys the more expensive Canon 10-22 stop using it after the novelty of the new lens wears off?

And along a similar vein, if you stop using a lens once the new kit novelty wears off, what's the point in buying new lenses at all? I (and I'm sure many others) have had a sigma 10-20 for years and still actively use it.

The only thing that's more wasteful than buying a lens that you'll only use a handfull of times is buying a lens that you'll only use a handfull of times and can only be used on EF-S compatible cameras. Wasteful or Moronic... Either fits

440Hz

I didnt mean the novelty wears off, I meant they are less impressed with it. Different things.

I agree with the EF-S point, but like I said I wont ever be buying a FF body. The only thing that would sway me towards the Sigma rather than the Canon is that I could put the difference towards something else later on.

Id hardly be 'wasting' my money on a WA Canon or Sigma if I thought i wasnt going to get the use out of it.

Carrigman

Whatever you do, don't buy the Canon 10-22mm. If you do, you will find that it remains almost permanently attached to your camera body and whatever other lenses you may have will languish, forgotten, in your gadget bag. Sure it takes fantastic shots with stunning angles of view etc., but who wants that? :-)

rymus

440Hz wrote:

I agree with the EF-S point, but like I said I wont ever be buying a FF body.

Doesn't matter a toss... Canon could decide to drop EF-S tomorrow. Next body you buy might not have EF-S support. Then you either have the interesting task of trying to sell an EF-S lens that nobody wants to buy anymore or taking a hacksaw to the back of the lens to make it EF compatible...

440Hz

rymus wrote:

Canon could decide to drop EF-S tomorrow.

How likely is that though? Not being smart, genuinely asking an opinion on that.

melekalikimaka

just move over to nikon if that happens, nikon would never hurt you like that

rymus

440Hz wrote:

How likely is that though? Not being smart, genuinely asking an opinion on that.

Only Canon know that I'm afraid...

440Hz

But why do YOU think they might do it? You must have some reasoning for thinking it.

rymus

Purely because I don't see EF-S lasting as a lens type/mount. Fine and good for entry level or even mid range bodies but as progress is made, sensor technologies change, camera sizes change... EF-S isn't up to the job. I haven't and definately will not be buying any EF-S lenses because I intend on owning a 1 series at some stage.

As the megapixel race continues and advances in sensor's are made, Canon may find that they've dug themselves into a hole by using EF-S and may decide to cut their losses, leaving some very ill-tempered owners out of pocket, but with an impressive collection of useless lenses.

As far as I'm concerned, buying EF-S lenses is false economy and best suited to a photographer that either doesn't know any better or never see's themselves upgrading to a different body. I think we all know that the latter of which is complete balls.

The old "buy good lenses, they'll last you a lifetime" line applies. Why buy a lens that may or may not be useless in years to come. Depends if you're a gambling sort or not I suppose.

JMcL

rymus wrote:

Purely because I don't see EF-S lasting as a lens type/mount. Fine and good for entry level or even mid range bodies but as progress is made, sensor technologies change, camera sizes change... EF-S isn't up to the job. I haven't and definately will not be buying any EF-S lenses because I intend on owning a 1 series at some stage.

I reckon there're a couple of good reasons why smaller sensors will be around for a while yet.

Firstly there's the cost of manufacture. Big chunks of silicon are expensive to manufacture, as the yield (ie the percentage of good chips they get from any particular disc of silicon) is low. The bigger the chip, the lower the yield, which is why medium format digital backs remain mind-bogglingly expensive (even taking into account a fair amount of Hassleblad prestige markup). No doubt the ratio will improve and price will come down as manufacturing processes improve, but the same improvement benefits smaller sensors as well, which makes them even cheaper.

Secondly, big sensors demand top quality lenses to cope with the light falloff towards the edges given that the actual light sensors are at the bottom of a little well, and are much more picky about the angle that light hits them than film, which is a flat plane. I really can't visualise the Canikon ad along the lines of "Body only €400, with kit lens €1500"

Borderfox

If you want to use a f2.8 at a gig why not go for a f1.8 or a f1.4 in the 50mm or 85mm. Far better for gig use than a 17-55 IS imo.

rymus

JMcL wrote:

Secondly, big sensors demand top quality lenses

All the more reason to spend the wise money on decent lenses that'll last you near enough a lifetime so... for when the big sensors do eventually come along

440Hz

Yeah I have a 50mm 1.8 that I use for gigs, but Id like the versatility of a zoom to go with it!

deaddonkey

Borderfox wrote:

If you want to use a f2.8 at a gig why not go for a f1.8 or a f1.4 in the 50mm or 85mm. Far better for gig use than a 17-55 IS imo.

i agree with this

the f1.8 is dirt cheap, get a wide angle if you like, and then pick up the 1.8 50mm, which is bloody fantastic, and cheap

440Hz

deaddonkey wrote:

i agree with this

the f1.8 is dirt cheap, get a wide angle if you like, and then pick up the 1.8 50mm, which is bloody fantastic, and cheap

^^ sorry just posted before you, I already have the Plastic Fantastic!!

I shoot at gigs most weeks, would be lost without it, but I just need more now. And all my other lenses are f/4

Fajitas!

Canon won't drop Ef-S

They have some excellent lenses in that range, plus it's great for the consumer market and a lot of people are beginning to go for the crop nowadays, especially nature photographers/sports/journo's.

I'd go for the 10-22, gets excellent reviews. The 10-20 is also a fantastic lens, but if the 10-22 is coming down in price, leap at it.

You won't go off a wide angle, ever. You might not use it as much as you did when you found out a wide angle is so wide and has so many uses, but you'll know exactly when to use it to get the best out of it. WA's can also be handheld at much lower speeds, so shake isn't much of a worry. I used my 10-20 for plenty of gigs without flash.

Borderfox

What about a 30mm f1.4? wider than the 50mm but faster. Anyway sounds like you are set on the 10-22.

Paulw

I have the 10-22mm and think it's great for wide angle shots.

440Hz

Borderfox wrote:

Anyway sounds like you are set on the 10-22.

Not set on it at all tbh. Before I posted here I was 'def' going for the 17-55

Typical female I just cant make my mind up

Cheers for all the posts guys, really appreciate it, good to get some opinions on it.

@Al, cheers for that post too, I feel much better/more relaxed hehe!

On a lighter note... two more gig shots making it to official sites this week. Better than the few mags have been getting lately but not going to beat my iTunes credit I really should start posting some more shots here, have only just started putting things on Flickr again! The buzz is slowly returning.

mikeanywhere

440Hz wrote:

The buzz is slowly returning.

About bloody time too ...........;)

440Hz

mikeanywhere wrote:

About bloody time too ...........;)

hehe you're to blame for most of it!! lol

440Hz

I almost clicked 'buynow' on the 17-55 last night but I keep coming back to the fact that its just a super-super fancy kit lens. Ok its sharp, has a lovely 2.8 across the range and it has my fav IS, but just sounds like such a limited range. Im so used to having 17-85 now, I think Id miss those extra mm's!

Nearly went with Al's (&Borderfox's) suggestions of the 10-22 and a prime like the Sigma 30mm 1.4 but for some reason I keep coming back to the 17-55 page too!

Urgh it shouldnt be this hard to pick one hehe!

Or should I go for something totally different again. (aside from Sigma 10-20 suggesetions, which are noted and appreciated)

Im just in a buying mood! Need a fix, fast!

positron

Have you considered the Sigma 17-70? It seems to get a lot of good reviews, and its cheap as well.

17-70 photos

440Hz

Yeah I did consider teh Sigma, and the Sigma 18-55 but seeing as I already have a very nice lens in that range I thought if I do go for that range again I'd def go for the Canon. Cheers for the link though, some nice stuff!