11-01-2010, 12:42 PM
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1288603574' post='3861']
MMV. I tried both 17-40 and 10-22 on my 40D. The 10-22 was sharper at the corners and had better flare resistance.
[/quote]
Yakim,
I said 17-40L on FF is better than 10-22 on APS-C, I wasn't saying anything about 17-40L on APS-C (40D).
17-40L on APS-C actually underperforms, from my own experience, and can't be compared to the 10-22 anyway. On a 40D the 17-540L is a short standard zoom, while the 10-22 is an UWA zoom.. It is really only when used as an UWA zoom on FF that the 17-40L comes into its own.
BTW, try shooting a 10-22 with high contrast conditions, do the same with 17-40L, and tell me what you see ... You might be amazed.
Kind regards, Wim
MMV. I tried both 17-40 and 10-22 on my 40D. The 10-22 was sharper at the corners and had better flare resistance.
[/quote]
Yakim,
I said 17-40L on FF is better than 10-22 on APS-C, I wasn't saying anything about 17-40L on APS-C (40D).
17-40L on APS-C actually underperforms, from my own experience, and can't be compared to the 10-22 anyway. On a 40D the 17-540L is a short standard zoom, while the 10-22 is an UWA zoom.. It is really only when used as an UWA zoom on FF that the 17-40L comes into its own.
BTW, try shooting a 10-22 with high contrast conditions, do the same with 17-40L, and tell me what you see ... You might be amazed.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....