With this lens my System is complete!

[DUCeditor]

Well I'm pretty excited. This lens - always to be a part of my system - is now mine. A Canon EF-S 10-22mm super-wide zoom. She's big, but not too heavy. Sharp and quite distortion free thanks to the ED glass and aspherical elements.

I call her "The Monster."

In that pic she is, obviously, wearing her hood. An important thing with a many-elemented wide zoom - especially when she is being used outdoor in the sun. But (sadly) she can't be stored that way unless I go to a significantly larger carrying case, something I am loath to do.

Still, sans hood, she fits in well. That's the T2i in the central compartment with the 12-22 in place. Neat eh?

Image examples will follow!

-don

[Bill_Anderson]

Originally Posted by DUCeditor

Image examples will follow!

-don

I am looking forward to those. Here is info on the lens for those interested:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum..._f_3_5_4_5_usm

[CAlexio]

so, what does it do?

[SS904]

Cool. Nice lens and you can use that hood for a Frisbee when you're bored! Samples!

[DUCeditor]

Originally Posted by alexio

so, what does it do?

The best way to answer that would be with pix, but that'll take a little time as I am still pretty much house-bound following surgery. But here is the general use of super-wide angle lenses...

There are basically three types of lenses: Standard, tele and wide angle.

A standard sees things the way the eyes do.

Now that statement can easily confuse because we see a broad swath from left to right but a photo is a small thing that takes up only a small part of our field of vision. But it sees as the human eye in that the spacial relationships match the way we naturally see things. Things close, things mid distance, and things far are the relative size we expect them to be. I.e., "Standard."

Tele lenses are often spoken of as having the ability to bring distant things close. And that is true. But from an imaging POV that is not their main attraction (well, it may be if you photographing birds and the like). What IS their main attraction is that they compress space. They pull objects that are far apart such as those in the mid-field with things that are distant.

Thus getting close with your camera is not the same as using a tele to fill the field with the subject to the same degree. Spacial compression changes with a tele. And that is both a composition tool AND a way to change the viewers perception of the world - often the key to a really good photograph.

A stereotypical example: The photo of a jet ( or E.T) flying in front of the moon and looking so close to the moon that it could land on it

Wide angles too are often not used for their greatest use. Yes, if your back is against the wall and you can't fit everyone into the picture a wide angle lens may solve that problem. But that is a subject issue, not an image issue.

The real value of wide angle is their ability to enlarge space. To emphasize the distance between objects, and thus to again change the viewers perception of the world (or at least the part of it being photographed).

And just as there are "teles" and extreme teles, there are "wide angle" and extreme wide angle lenses. These do what wide angles do but do it in spades! They REALLY expand space. They enable a photographer to fill the frame with a detail and then relate that detail to the environment.

Stereotypical example: A mouse so large it nearly fills the frame and a terrified girl looking at it and getting ready to shriek in the distance. Both perfectly sharp and clear.

Some people do their best work with normal lens. Such photographers greatest gifts are usually that of finding interesting subjects and catching them at the perfect moment and framing them in a visually interesting and appealing way.

Other photographers typically use teles. Most often for their ability to get close, but sometimes to as a space compression device. That makes one say "wow! nice photograph!" while the earlier makes you say something like "Wow! cool subject! I never saw one around here."

I am a wide angle guy. I love to point something small out by filling a good portion of the frame with it but to place it in context; in space. Wide angle lenses can do that. Super wides can do it more but with a much greater compositional challenge.

The 10-22 gives me a lot of flexibility with how much spacial expansion I desire to have and how much of the environment I choose to include along with the subject.

Does that make sense to you? If not it will once I (or others) post some pics that demonstrate the effects I described.

-don

[Bill_Anderson]

Don: a picture is worth 1,000 words.

[DUCeditor]

Originally Posted by Bill_Anderson

Don: a picture is worth 1,000 words.

That depends upon the picture.



But for the sake of demonstration, using a quickly taken (and poor) set of photos, here is the same basic shot taken with three types of lenses:

Note that the subject size remains essentially the same, but its relationship to its environment changes. In terms of composition, this is a key, if not the key reason to choose a normal, tele or wide angle lens.

Questions? Comments?

-don

[CAlexio]

thank you for taking the time to explain that!

I've been meaning to learn more about photography but sex always gets in the way.

[VTGPDUC]

Does it affect the speed, frames per second, that you can take? Novice question.

[DUCeditor]

Originally Posted by VTGPDUC

Does it affect the speed, frames per second, that you can take? Novice question.

By speed do you mean shutter speed? If so, yes, at least when hand held. Wide lenses are much more forgiving of small amounts of motion. i.e, apparent blur is less. Thus longer shutter speeds can be used.

Higher shutter speeds, regardless of lens type, depend on the widest available aperture, available light and chosen sensor sensitivity.

Frames per second? That would depend on the particular lens's focusing speed. As a general rule teles require a larger movement of the elements to change focus from near to far. For most application and with most good lenses this is rarely an issue.

In any case once focused has been locked that issue becomes mute. If tracking is being used between motorized sequential shots that it may have a slowing effect dependent, again, on the specific lens.

In the case of the Canon EF-S 10-22mm focus is fast. This is an upscale lens with Canon's ultrasonic motor. Very quick. Almost silent.

-don