Canon 10-22 worse than my 18-55 IS II @ 18 mm?

[majestros]

I didn't realize that when copying from another forum I had lost formatting and turned this into a wall of text, here I am reposting it more legibly:

After some consideration about what wide angle lens to choose, I ended up purchasing the Canon 10-22 yesterday (in a close race over the new Tokina 12-28).

Once I got home I took it out to take some pictures around the yard and was thoroughly unimpressed with it's optics. Crazy amounts of CA, dominating the corners but still visible mid frame and really mushy sharpness outside the center 1/9th (by area) of the image.

I have read similar threads where many of the people say it is user error on the part of the new WA lens owner. I tried to take some "flat images" (the grass at my feet, etc) and the sharpness is somewhat better (so some of that was my fault) but still bad for a lens that costs 4x the cost of my kit lens.

When taking a picture of a test chart, I see CA over most of the chart (anything outside the center 1/9th, even with terrible lighting (so the contrast wouldn't be as bad)). And when I took a picture of my front door, shaded by an awning, CA was visible even on the edges of the door panels (white door, so some slight shade on the edges of relief features). No CA was visible on the 18-55 when taking a picture of the test chart under similar conditions.

So I decided to take some pictures @18mm and compare them with pictures taken with my 18-55 IS II @18mm. 18 should be about the sweet spot for the 10-22 from what I have read. The CA is similar (though the CA on my 10-22 is "sharper" than on my 18-55 so it is more noticeable on the 10-22) between lenses but the 10-22 has mushier edges/corners than the 18-55.

Okay, so any ideas? do I have a bad copy of the 10-22? I know I can correct the CA to some degree in post but poor sharpness is a result.

I purchased the lens from Best Buy so that I could use a gift card, has anyone had trouble returning lenses to Best Buy recently? I did notice that the lens box had some dents in it, nothing huge but might indicate some impacts in the lenses history.

Thanks for any thoughts!

[ebiggs1]

The Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens is not only a sharp lens but it is a very sharp lens.

Without seeing what you have done or how, I can not say if it is the lens or not.

[majestros]

I'll post some pictures when I get home tonight, thanks 🙂

[Skirball]

As Biggs said, it’d help to see an example, as we have no idea what your expectations are.

It’s an UWA, so you’re not going to get the tact sharpness you would with a longer lens or something like a prime.  But that said, I love my 10-22 and used to use it often before moving to FF.  Wide open @10mm the results aren’t anything to write home about, but it does fine once you stop down.  I can’t say I’ve spent a lot of time with it in the 18-22mm range, but it should perform at least as well as your kit lens.  There’s some CA when shooting ultrawide, but nothing terrible.  Perhaps you got a dud?