06-07-2014 08:05 PM - edited 06-07-2014 09:55 PM
Solved! Go to Solution.
06-18-2014 11:33 AM - edited 06-18-2014 12:13 PM
@AlanRhodes wrote:Thank you all. I am going to send in the EF-S 10-22 to Canon and hope the cost is not too high to repair an already costly lens. I am buying a Tamron AF 17-50 mm F/2.8 SP XR Di II VC to have for this weekend sons grad party since my go to Canon lens for this type of family shots is out of serveice.
Feeling a little burned on the Canon lens, I paided the higher lens cost for the Canon expecting longer service and quality then I received. But since I am a novice I am going to give Tamron a try for my future business this go around.
Regarding the Tamron lens, the non-VC version is thought by most users to give better image quality than the more expensive VC version. And both versions do not have a USD focus system, which Tamron is starting to put on their more premium models and is similar to Canon's USM. So do not expect the same level of focus performance as you would typically see with a 10-22mm or the Canon EF-S 17-55mm, which costs more but also gives top quality IS and a slightly longer telephoto.
Frankly, the problem you have with the 10-22mm seems quite unusual. Not to defend Canon (they can do that themselves), but I rarely see any complaints about that particular lens. Most users are very happy with the 10-22mm, many consider it one of the best ultrawides made by anyone, and decentered lens elements are usually the result of a hard bump to the lens or heavy wear and tear on moving parts, or occasionally a manufacturing flaw. I would encourage you to not judge Canon lenses on the whole, or even this ultrawide model, based upon your bad experiences with this one particular copy of the lens.
For your purposes - family shots - an ultrawide lens wouldn't be my first choice anyway. I think most photogs would call a 17-50 or 17-55/2.8 a better choice. Taking photos of people with an ultrawide, they often end up too small in the image, or heavily distorted if the lens is used close enough to fill the frame. This isn't any fault with the ultrawide lens, it's just the nature of wide angle optics. There are reasons that portrait lenses tend to be short to moderate telephoto focal lengths. A standard zoom (covering slightly wide to normal to short telephoto range of focal lengths), such as 18-55, 17-50, 17-55 would be a better choice in most cases.
I'm sure ebiggs assertions about EF-S lenses have a lot to do with his use of several cameras that cannot be fitted with EF-S lenses. I do too... so I minimize the number of "crop only" lenses in my kit (but the EF-S 10-22mm is one of several exceptons). You don't have this limitation with a 60D, which can use both EF and EF-S mount lenses without any problem. That being the case, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM is likely a better choice for you. For close to the same money, it has better image quality than the 17-40L, as well as f2.8 aperture and a wider range of focal lengths. The only place the L lens excels over the 17-55mm is probably build quality... The 17-40L is likely a bit better built and sealed to resist dust and moisture.
There are not and never will be an EF-S L-series lens. This isn't in any way due to the quality of EF-S lenses. It is only because Canon's own definition of what constitutes and L-series includes a stipulation that they must be compatible with all EOS cameras past, present and future. By design, EF-S lenses are not usable on film, digital full frame, or digital APS-H crop sensor camera models. They are compatible with APS-C crop sensor models, which are the vast majority of DSLRs that Canon sells, beginning with the original digital Rebel and 20D models of 2004/2005.
Several EF-S lenses are top quality and offer performance that rivals or even sets the standard among all manufacturers. The 10-22mm is one of those (usually... a faulty copy such as yours is very rare). I'd also count the EF-S 17-55mm, EF-S 15-85mm and EF-S 60/2.8 Macro lenses among the very best in their respective categories.
***********
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM
06-08-2014 01:23 PM
You cleaned the contacts on the lens and the camera with denatured alcohol and a q-tip? You did not try to use an eraser didi you?
06-08-2014 01:58 PM
06-08-2014 10:10 PM
"Other AF lens work fine."
OK now you need to try your 10-22mm on another camera. If it still misbehaves, call Canon Support for a local repair shop.
06-15-2014 04:22 PM
06-15-2014 05:31 PM
06-15-2014 05:38 PM
06-15-2014 05:55 PM
"My son brought over his Canon and the lens worked better..."
What does "better" mean? Either it worked or it didn't. If it is still screwed up, even a little, there is something wrong with the lens. If it worked it is your camera.
06-15-2014 06:04 PM
Yes did not work on both. I just took some more test image and can see right side of image is clear and all from center to right is not focused in a landscape image below
06-15-2014 06:05 PM
in image you can see difference in stones and two birds
01/27/2025: New firmware updates are available.
12/18/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS C300 Mark III - Version 1..0.9.1
EOS C500 Mark II - Version 1.1.3.1
12/05/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R5 Mark II - Version 1.0.2
09/26/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R6 Mark II - Version 1.5.0
Canon U.S.A Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part without permission is prohibited.