10-22mm chromatic abberation

brownin

brownin

Messages
907
Name
nathan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello Guru's
So my questions. Is it really that bad?

I've been looking at purchasing a uwa for my 500d, read lots and lots of reviews, 10-22 has better build quality, sharper at edges etc but apparently fringing is awful, especially compared to the newer 10-18mm stm item. People have stated IQ on the 10-18mm is equivalent if not better because of the Chromatic Abberation so I thought no brainer but... long term I have my heart set on a 6d and I've read with a baffle change this will work incredibly well allbeit chromatic abberation still an issue.

I like the idea of the 10-22 as it could inevitably be a good walk around lens coupled with my favoured 50mm f1.8, thoughts....?

I've also considered the tokina 11-16mm f2.8 as that is said to be an excellent lens in both IQ and build quality and can also be used full frame at certain focal lengths but....(again) the range difference is huge, how much difference in an image is 10mm over 11mm? the 16-22mm i've read people miss when buying this lens over the 10-22...

somebody help me....
 
My 10-22 does have some CA, but apply the lightroom profile for the lens and it's all gone, not an issue. It's such a small, light lens and good performer that I always had it in my camera bag
 
There isn't a wide zoom in existence that doesn't have some CA. Lens designers these days often assume correction in software and it's a good solution, allowing them to improve other things instead.

If you want to go full-frame, then get full-frame lenses. Even if APS-C lenses will fit, you will lose coverage at the wide end and performance will not be as good. You can't swap around between formats like that with wide-angles. If you have full-frame in mind, and are firm on that, then my advice is to get the 6D first and not spend any more money on APS-C. It will be cheaper in the long run.
 
brownin said:
long term I have my heart set on a 6d and I've read with a baffle change this will work incredibly well allbeit chromatic abberation still an issue.

I like the idea of the 10-22 as it could inevitably be a good walk around lens coupled with my favoured 50mm f1.8, thoughts....?
Click to expand...

Back when I had a Canon 20D I bought a 10-22mm but I didn't rate it and it quickly made way for a Sigma 12-24mm which in my opinion is a much better lens. Obviously you lose 2mm at the wide end but on the positive side it's a full frame lens and at the wide end will give you a very wide view on a full frame camera.

If you want a wide angle on your APS-C but want to future proof yourself for a possible 6D you could take a look at the Sigma 12-24mm. IMVHO it's an excellent lens.
 
I own the 10-22 and the 11-16. CA is very similar on both, slightly worse on the Tokina. What really ruins the Tokina is the awful flare. From the example shots I've seen of the 10-18 it seems that flare handling is between the 10-22 and the 11-16.
 
woof woof said:
Back when I had a Canon 20D I bought a 10-22mm but I didn't rate it and it quickly made way for a Sigma 12-24mm which in my opinion is a much better lens. Obviously you lose 2mm at the wide end but on the positive side it's a full frame lens and at the wide end will give you a very wide view on a full frame camera.

If you want a wide angle on your APS-C but want to future proof yourself for a possible 6D you could take a look at the Sigma 12-24mm. IMVHO it's an excellent lens.
Click to expand...

Good suggestion. The Sigma 12-24 Mk2 is a very good lens, but mega-wide on full-frame.
 
HoppyUK said:
Good suggestion. The Sigma 12-24 Mk2 is a very good lens, but mega-wide on full-frame.
Click to expand...

Only partly true :D as it's a zoom lens and whilst on a FF camera it's mega wide at 12mm at the longer end it's simply impressively wide.

Other FF wide angle lenses may start at 16 or 17 or even 20mm and these lengths are obviously covered by the Sigma as well as the "mega wide" end. The issue with the Sigma 12-24mm on FF is at the longer end as other FF wide angle lenses may typically go from 16, 17 or 20mm at the wide end to maybe 35 or 40mm at their longest end whilst the Sigma stops at 24mm.

Personally I never saw the Sigma's lack of zoom at the longer end as an issue but it is something to consider. You lose at the longer end but you gain at the wider end. Your money, your choice :D
 
woof woof said:
Other FF wide angle lenses may start at 16 or 17 or even 20mm and these lengths are obviously covered by the Sigma as well as the "mega wide" end. The issue with the Sigma 12-24mm on FF is at the longer end as other FF wide angle lenses may typically go from 16, 17 or 20mm at the wide end to maybe 35 or 40mm at their longest end whilst the Sigma stops at 24mm.
Click to expand...

So where the 24 end is too short, just swap on a 27-xx(x)mm lens and sorted.
 
brownin said:
I thought that too woof woof, multiply 12 x 1.6 gives me 19.2? or am I doing it wrong?
Click to expand...

Wrong way around. 12mm on full-frame equates to same field of view as 7.5mm on APS-C 1.6x (not to be confused with fish-eye lenses - different kettle of, erm, fish).
 
HoppyUK said:
Wrong way around. 12mm on full-frame equates to same field of view as 7.5mm on APS-C 1.6x (not to be confused with fish-eye lenses - different kettle of, erm, fish).
Click to expand...

confused :thinking::help:

the 12-24 full frame lens on my crop would equate to 19mm on aps-c no?
 
Last edited:
brownin said:
confused :thinking::help:
Click to expand...

Divide by 1.6, not multiply. Just ignore the fish-eye comment, just that they often have similar-ish focal lengths but play by different rules.
 
brownin said:
confused :thinking::help:

the 12-24 full frame lens on my crop would equate to 19mm on aps-c no?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear... YES.

Mount a lens on your APS-C and multiply the focal length by x1.6 for the full frame equivalence. So, the Sigma will be 12-24mm on FF but will give the equivalent FF FoV of 19-38mm when mounted on your APS-C camera. The Canon 10-22mm is APS-C only and gives a FF equivalent FoV of 16-35mm on your APS-C camera.

On APS-C the Sigma is slightly less wide than the Canon 10-22mm (19mm equivalent FoV v 16mm equiv.) but personally I thought that it (the Sigma) was wide enough.
 
Last edited:
brownin said:
confused :thinking::help:

the 12-24 full frame lens on my crop would equate to 19mm on aps-c no?
Click to expand...

Yes. I can only assume the reference to 7.5mm is that's what would be needed on APS-C to equate to 12mm on FF. I used to use my Canon 17-40 (and 28-135) as a walk around lens on an old 30D until I got a 24-70, now I use it as my wide angle on FF.

You can modify the 10-22 to be able to use it on FF though. :)
 
stu.artd said:
Yes. I can only assume the reference to 7.5mm is that's what would be needed on APS-C to equate to 12mm on FF. I used to use my Canon 17-40 (and 28-135) as a walk around lens on an old 30D until I got a 24-70, now I use it as my wide angle on FF.

You can modify the 10-22 to be able to use it on FF though. :)
Click to expand...

I think I will go the 10-22 then, you don't even need to do the above apparently all you need is this part number from canon (1-866-481-2569) or ask for a 28-75mm rear baffle, pop it out replace and voila

opinions on 2nd hand lenses from a reputable retailer?
 
HoppyUK said:
Why would you want to do that? There is some point to converting a 10-22 on a 1D3 or 1D4 camera, but not on full frame.

The lens will fit, but you can't go wider than 12mm without the rear hitting the mirror, and you will still get black corners.
Click to expand...

Just posted it as info for the OP, strange that they didn't mention the corners in some of the posted replies, only the fact that there was a limit on the zoom due to the rear of the lens hitting the mirror, hence a piece of wire fitted to restrict that movement, not something I would ever consider doing myself, the 10-22mm for a crop sensor. If i was in the OP situation, intending to eventually go to full frame, then I would get a different lens suitable for full frame.
 
The Canon 10-22 is a stunning lens, no more CA than any other zoom.

Not sure why you're concerned about this?

Great lens.

If you're planning on going FF (for definite) it makes sense to consider the Sigma 12-24 mk2.
 
Last edited:
brownin said:
I think I will go the 10-22 then, you don't even need to do the above apparently all you need is this part number from canon (1-866-481-2569) or ask for a 28-75mm rear baffle, pop it out replace and voila

opinions on 2nd hand lenses from a reputable retailer?
Click to expand...
But it's still an APSC lens, you'll get terrible vignetting. Frankly you'll end u with half your lens.

If you buy the 12-24, you'll lose a little on your current camera but have a great lens on your next one.

Or just be sensible, buy the lens that's right now. And when you go FF, swap it for the right lens then. As you want a lens that'll do the same thing on both cameras, that's technically impossible, so just accept that and buy the lens you need rather than one you think will 'do'. I will guarantee if you buy the 10-22 then the adaptor, you'll sell it within a year of buying the 6d.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top