Canon 24-105 quality vs 10-22mm

A

A_S

Messages
910
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

After posting a photo where someone questioned he quality of my canon 10-22 EFS I decided to try a little comparison with my 24-105 (which has been my walk around lens for some 7 or 8 years and never had an issue with it).

I'm just looking for opinions on whether the quality difference is what you would expect between these 2 lenses? I must admit, when I put them side by side I was quite shocked (at full size) given that all the reviews I have read, and what I based my purchase on, was the supposed "L quality without the red band" of this lens. I expected it to be a little softer given that the 10-22 is slightly wider angle than @ 22 than the 24-105 @ 24, and the fact it isn't an L series but Im still surprised at the stark contrast when you look at the trees and reads.

In terms of the test, I know it isnt exactly scientific, I took the pics 3 minutes apart, at F11, 0.8s, ISO 100 - if I was planning the test I probably would have used a higher ISO to reduce the exposure time, but it was a spur of the moment thing. Both set to at or abouts the hyperfocal distance for the respective focal length (again perhaps change in a more controlled test). both applied the same settings in camera raw, default sharpening and lens correction, no noise reduction.


24mm vs 22 comparison by Andrew_S84, on Flickr

24-105 left, 10-22 right.


What do others think? does my 10-22 have a quality issue?
 
Last edited:
It's tricky to say without having the same areas to compare.

At that size there isn't much of a difference.

The reeds in the centre of the pic (just either side of the join) do differ though.

Also, on a 7D your not going anywhere near the edges of the 24-105 lens.
 
Last edited:
True, I had not not concidered that - but the reeds are in the centre of the picture on both lenses. I thought I might get that question about comparing areas so i've got an example ready, just need to upload it, hang on.
 
That's quite a difference, the 10-22 looks sharpest about halfway between the midpoint and the right side of the photo. I've never used one myself but it may be worth sending it and your camera to Canon for adjustment as I'd have expected it to be better than that
 
Thanks,

Ideally if someone that has this lens could give me an opinion that would be great. I bought it from Jessops in May so I may take it back today and get their opinion.
 
Hate to bump this one but surely more than 1 person has used this lens or can offer some advice? (or are more people interested in that inane and unhelpful 1DX thread :bang:)
 
A_S said:
Hate to bump this one but surely more than 1 person has used this lens or can offer some advice? (or are more people interested in that inane and unhelpful 1DX thread :bang:)
Click to expand...

Not sure if you want my opinion given the above. However:

I've got both of these lenses. And I've recently (in the last couple of days sold my 7d).

The 10-22 looks perfectly fine to me. In the distance it is perhaps slightly softer, however it's nothing I would worry about. Try having a play around with different apertures and focus on the 10-22 to see if you can get a better result out of it.
 
A_S said:
Hate to bump this one but surely more than 1 person has used this lens or can offer some advice? (or are more people interested in that inane and unhelpful 1DX thread :bang:)
Click to expand...

I have owned both in the past but no longer own any EF-S lenses. I don't recall any obvious differences between the two in terms of Image quality.
 
I have both these lenses on my 7d. The 10-22 I find is incredibly sharp. The24-105 is also sharp but needs more processing than the 10-22
 
Thanks, I have been playing around over the weekend, taking pictures of the house, bricks etc and went back to the park today to do some tests (although a bit hazy). It doesnt appear to be the lens, but me (no surprise there) and my ability to set the hyperfocal length on the 10-20. Focussing at the same point on the horizon they are equily as sharp.
 
All's well that ends well then. :)
Glad it was down to a slight user error, it's easier to fix that than if it had been a lens problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top