 Alex B |
10-22mm cannon vs 17-40mm Hey I have a Cannon 400D camera. at the moment I have a 100mm macro, 75-300 and 18-55mm kit lens's. I am looking to upgrade to a better lens. My main type of pictures are landscapes, and 95% of the time I shoot with my 18-55mm lens at 18mm. The two options I have been looking to upgrade to are the 17-40mm or the 10-22mm . I know the 17-40mm is for full body cameras. So I was wondering how wide it would open on the Full body cameras, as well as my 400D (relative to the 10-22mm) so like on the 400D which lens will be wider? and on a full body camera, which lens would be wider? (i know the 10-22mm doesnt work on a full body but like 17-40mm on full body vs 10-22mm on 400D). The possibility of upgrading my camera to a full body is there within the next few years. Thanks Alex
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alex B |
Just to clarify, im not quite sure of the terminology, but when I say *wider* I meant lower mm/zoom out, not appature. So pretty much I wanna know how much of a landscape each lens could fit in on each body relative to the other
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
The focal lengths are as marked. The EF 17-40 f/4L USM is an ultrawide zoom on a 35mm film or "full frame" DSLR camera. On those cameras, 17mm give 103° diagonal angle of view. But on the 400D it is just a better built replacement for your kit EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6, giving only very slightly wider angle but less tele range. On the 400D, 17mm = 77° diagonal angle of view, 18mm = 75°. The EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM on a 400D gives the ultra-wide angle you're looking for. 10mm = 107° diagonal angle of view on the 400D.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
oops, very very minor correction: 18mm = 74° angle of view on the 400D, not 75°.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi Alex, The camera lens projects a miniature image of the outside world onto the surface of the light sensitive chip inside the camera. The image projected is circular and not uniform being dim at the periphery. Thus the edges must be baffled off by a mask that defines the chip boundaries. When fitted with a long lens this natural vignette is not a problem. When fitted with a short lens, vignette limits how short the lens can be. Additionally as the lens is made shorter the back glass element will be close to the chip. At some point it will interfere with the action of SLR mirror function. This can be countered using a retro-focus, a backwards telephoto, something like looking through a binocular backwards. It is customary to fit a camera with a lens that has a focal length about equal to the diagonal measure of the format. 1. At his focal length the vignette is not a hindrance. 2. The angular field sustained matches the human prospective i.e. the image presented is said to be “normal” (53°). When fitted with shorter lens the angular field of view increases thus the realm of the wide-angle. When fitted with a lens longer than the diagonal we enter into telephoto territory. The full frame established by the E. Leitz with the Leica camera is unchanged today, set to 24mm by 36mm by engineer Oskar Barnack in 1913. This format has a diagonal measure of 43.3mm. By tradition this is rounded to 50mm thus most 35mm cameras are fitted with a 50mm “normal” lens. As you know TV’s are sold by size. The size quoted is the diagonal measure. It sounds more impressive because it is the hypotenuse of the rectangle this the biggest measure. So too lens makers and camera maker mention only the diagonal angular field when they give the angle of view. Not the most valuable data. Full frame 24mm by 36mm diagonal 43.3mm 50mm lens 27° h 40° w 47° diagonal Canon 400D 14.8mm by 22.2mm diagonal 26.7mm 26mm lens 31° h 45° w 53° diagonal Well this should confuse, after all I must live up to my reputation of being imprecise i.e. gobbledygook Alan Marcus, Anaheim, CA
|
|
|
|
||
|
Melissa McCabe |
Alex, I have the same camera and both of those lenses (lucky me!). The 10-22 is much wider. It's the middle of the night or I'd shoot you some examples. The salesgeek assured me I would benefit from my 10-22 if I ever choose to upgrade my camera body... don't recall any mention of incompatibility with full frame.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jon Close |
EF-S lenses like the 10-22 are limited to use on Canon DSLRs that have the 15mm x 22.5mm sized sensor (aka "APS-C" or "1.6x crop"). That includes the Digital Rebels - 300D, 350D, 400D, and newly introduced 450D - and the upgrade pro-sumer line of 20D, 30D, 40D. They are not compatible with the larger sensor bodies like the 1D, 1Ds and 5D.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Melissa McCabe |
Then I should have done more homework and not relied on salesgeek's advice, which was contrary to yours... The 1D/5D are too heavy for me anyway ; ) Either way, perhaps the salesgeek did have the resale value part right - that if you buy both you'd be able to pass this one along to another user and recover much of your cost later on?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Robyn Gwilt |
Alex, I currently use the Sigma 17-70 which I find great for my landscape photography (along with a polariser :) ) it's also got a 1:2 macro, so I can get incredibly close, and is razor sharp - its a really great lens, and great bang for your buck. Not sure of the cost in the US, but I'm in South Africa, and EVERYTHING here is USD based, and we're anything from R7.70/USD1 - so all photog equipment is expensive. I shoot with a 350D and a Canon 30D
|
|
|
|
||
- Ken Smith Contact Ken Smith Ken Smith's Gallery |
I have the Sigma 10-20mm lens for the 30D. I like it alot. My photo from today used that lens.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||