C100: New Canon Wide Angle Zooms
- Thread starter cathstrat
- Start date
Catherine,
I too am interested in the affordable wide angle but I am hesitant as I am sure the manual focus mechanics are going to be weak in comparison with the L series lenses that I have now. Perhaps with the STM feature the darn thing will auto focus like a champ if you have the Dual Pixel upgrade. I guess focus mechanics aren't nearly as important on a wider lens where you are far less likely to be rack focusing anyway. I am definitely wanting to check this one out.
I too am interested in the affordable wide angle but I am hesitant as I am sure the manual focus mechanics are going to be weak in comparison with the L series lenses that I have now. Perhaps with the STM feature the darn thing will auto focus like a champ if you have the Dual Pixel upgrade. I guess focus mechanics aren't nearly as important on a wider lens where you are far less likely to be rack focusing anyway. I am definitely wanting to check this one out.
Ebrahim Saadawi
Carbonite Member
A Canom 10-18mm, with STM (perfect for dual-pixel AF), and Image stabilization, for twice the price the kit lens, it's hard to believe!
The thing is, it IS a kit lens. It made to be a companion for the 18-55mm (that's why it ends at 18mm) and the 55-250mm kit lenses.
So it will have similar build quality, weight and size as these lenses.
I've used both kit-lenses before and they're good in terms of build quality, just not excellent. They're all plastic but the optical quality is no different than L lenses.
The thing is, it IS a kit lens. It made to be a companion for the 18-55mm (that's why it ends at 18mm) and the 55-250mm kit lenses.
So it will have similar build quality, weight and size as these lenses.
I've used both kit-lenses before and they're good in terms of build quality, just not excellent. They're all plastic but the optical quality is no different than L lenses.
All of the newer Canon lenses have been very good for their price point.
I like the 18-135 mm STM lens quite a bit. It is the only non-L lens that I have used consistently in perhaps 10 years. I understand that the 18-135 may be better than the 18-55? I have not tried that lens.
The STM lenses are key to some uses of Dual Pixel Auto Focus, either basic auto focus use, or creative "focus pulls" by using the touch screen, etc. To me, they are worth it at the price point just to have in the kit.
+++++
The Canon 16-35 4.0 L IS looks to be an excellent lens, judging by the MTF charts and preliminary comments. It is also at a nice price point.
I have the 17-40 4.0 L, which is a decent/OK lens, but the new 16-35 looks to be much, much better, especially in the corners. It will make an excellent pair with the 24-70 4.0 IS and/or 70-200 4.0 IS.
+++++
I have the 24-70 2.8 II and the 70-200 2.8 II, both incredibly good lenses. The 16-35 mm 2.8 is an older lens, that should be replaced soon, too, with a 2.8 version.
I also keep the 70-200 4.0, because the 2.8 is such a huge beast. It is sometimes nice to carry and use the 4.0 when the extra stop isn't needed (although the 2.8 is better than the 4.0)
For those that can't justify the 2.8 lenses, the 4.0 are an excellent set at perhaps 1/2 the cost (depending on when bought - the 24-70 4.0 can be had at $900 on sale, the 24-70 2.8 is $1,800 or more.)
It can be a hard decision. There are also the EF-S lenses made for a crop sensor, like the 17-55 2.8, that a lot of folks like.
+++++
In general, the newer Canon lenses have faster and more accurate autofocus and are better quality than the older Canon lenses, so it is worth looking at the newer lenses. I am not sure where the cutoff is, but these articles cite the start of the more accurately focusing lenses as being in 2010.
This is a somewhat technical set of articles, but you can see how much more accurately the newer Canon lenses can focus than the older Canon lenses (look at the tightness of the pattern on the last graph on the first link):
From the 3rd/last article, from 2012:
As it turns out, my little tests just confirm things that were already published (if obscurely.)
The two newest Canon cameras (5DIII & 1DX) have more accurate phase-detection sensors than their previous cameras. The newest lenses have more accurate focus movement (or provide more accurate focus movement feedback, or both) that takes advantage of those sensors.
Older cameras don’t have accurate enough AF sensors to take advantage of the new lenses’ capabilities. Older lenses can’t move their focusing elements with enough accuracy to take advantage of the new cameras’ accurate sensors.
Now, it is not clear EXACTLY how this relates to the newer DPAF. But I believe it still means that the newer lenses will focus more accurately than the older lenes with DPAF.
Cheers! Sorry for the technical data dump at the end .... ignore if it makes your head hurt!
I like the 18-135 mm STM lens quite a bit. It is the only non-L lens that I have used consistently in perhaps 10 years. I understand that the 18-135 may be better than the 18-55? I have not tried that lens.
The STM lenses are key to some uses of Dual Pixel Auto Focus, either basic auto focus use, or creative "focus pulls" by using the touch screen, etc. To me, they are worth it at the price point just to have in the kit.
+++++
The Canon 16-35 4.0 L IS looks to be an excellent lens, judging by the MTF charts and preliminary comments. It is also at a nice price point.
I have the 17-40 4.0 L, which is a decent/OK lens, but the new 16-35 looks to be much, much better, especially in the corners. It will make an excellent pair with the 24-70 4.0 IS and/or 70-200 4.0 IS.
+++++
I have the 24-70 2.8 II and the 70-200 2.8 II, both incredibly good lenses. The 16-35 mm 2.8 is an older lens, that should be replaced soon, too, with a 2.8 version.
I also keep the 70-200 4.0, because the 2.8 is such a huge beast. It is sometimes nice to carry and use the 4.0 when the extra stop isn't needed (although the 2.8 is better than the 4.0)
For those that can't justify the 2.8 lenses, the 4.0 are an excellent set at perhaps 1/2 the cost (depending on when bought - the 24-70 4.0 can be had at $900 on sale, the 24-70 2.8 is $1,800 or more.)
It can be a hard decision. There are also the EF-S lenses made for a crop sensor, like the 17-55 2.8, that a lot of folks like.
+++++
In general, the newer Canon lenses have faster and more accurate autofocus and are better quality than the older Canon lenses, so it is worth looking at the newer lenses. I am not sure where the cutoff is, but these articles cite the start of the more accurately focusing lenses as being in 2010.
This is a somewhat technical set of articles, but you can see how much more accurately the newer Canon lenses can focus than the older Canon lenses (look at the tightness of the pattern on the last graph on the first link):
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-ii-1-vs-2-and-old-vs-new
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-3a-canon-lenses
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-3a-canon-lenses
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras
From the 3rd/last article, from 2012:
In Summary
As it turns out, my little tests just confirm things that were already published (if obscurely.)
The two newest Canon cameras (5DIII & 1DX) have more accurate phase-detection sensors than their previous cameras. The newest lenses have more accurate focus movement (or provide more accurate focus movement feedback, or both) that takes advantage of those sensors.
Older cameras don’t have accurate enough AF sensors to take advantage of the new lenses’ capabilities. Older lenses can’t move their focusing elements with enough accuracy to take advantage of the new cameras’ accurate sensors.
Now, it is not clear EXACTLY how this relates to the newer DPAF. But I believe it still means that the newer lenses will focus more accurately than the older lenes with DPAF.
Cheers! Sorry for the technical data dump at the end .... ignore if it makes your head hurt!
Last edited:
I own the Canon 10-22 and I have to say that it one of my most used lenses in my kit. The 10-22 is the 16-35 full frame equivalent which I also own. The optics are terrific but the build quality does not feel as solid as my L series glass. Having said that, I appreciate how light weight and small the 10-22 is when shooting hand held/run & gun. The new lens at only $299.00 should be a no brainer to those seeking an ultra wide zoom. The lens performs well utilizing the new auto focus update mounted on my Glidecam 4000. I hope this helps! God Bless!
Andrius Simutis
Veteran
Total impulse purchase, but I bought the 10-18 this past weekend. So far with only a little bit of messing around with it I'm liking it. It's wide, really W I D E and without too much distortion. I haven't had time to really put it through its paces and check things like edge sharpness and falloff, but so far so good. I'll write more once I test it out fully and shoot some stuff with it.
Photozone has a technical review of the lens. It looks incredibly sharp, especially for an ultra wide angle, and a $300 one at that!
"We've seen it already with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM ... Canon really knows how to design sharp lenses even at this price point. The MTF results are nothing short of astounding....
The Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM may be very slow but it is darn sharp in the relevant aperture range. In fact it is every bit as good as the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM here ... at half the price!"
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is
+++
Keith Cooper has more of a "walkaround" review of the lens, along with some pointers on usage:
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/lenses/canon_efs10-18.html
He seems very happy with it too.
Let us know how you make out!! It can be a lot of fun to be one of the first to get a new piece of equipment. Especially when it doesn't cost too much money ...
Good luck!
Best,
Michael
"We've seen it already with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM ... Canon really knows how to design sharp lenses even at this price point. The MTF results are nothing short of astounding....
The Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM may be very slow but it is darn sharp in the relevant aperture range. In fact it is every bit as good as the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM here ... at half the price!"
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is
+++
Keith Cooper has more of a "walkaround" review of the lens, along with some pointers on usage:
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/lenses/canon_efs10-18.html
He seems very happy with it too.
Let us know how you make out!! It can be a lot of fun to be one of the first to get a new piece of equipment. Especially when it doesn't cost too much money ...
Good luck!
Best,
Michael
Andrius Simutis
Veteran
$299
icarusfilm
Veteran
I was shooting with it yesterday. Its great, sharp, less distortion than the 10-22, sigma 8-16 or the 11-16 tokina.
Amazing IS and really good and silent AF with the Dual pixel upgrade. Also useful with push auto iris the aperture ramping is very smooth. This one is sofar my favorite UWA and I have owned all of the above at some point. I would actually buy it if it costed twice as much without hesitation. This is a fantastic lens for bare bones handheld shooting.
All the new STMs are very useful for run and gun.
Amazing IS and really good and silent AF with the Dual pixel upgrade. Also useful with push auto iris the aperture ramping is very smooth. This one is sofar my favorite UWA and I have owned all of the above at some point. I would actually buy it if it costed twice as much without hesitation. This is a fantastic lens for bare bones handheld shooting.
All the new STMs are very useful for run and gun.