When this lens was first announced, I had aspirations of adding it to cover my WA
needs. Then I heard people say, " You like "L", lenses, go for the Canon 17-40mm!"
Well, that all sounds nice and the 17-40mm might be a good lens and all, but, its just not wide enough for me. I thought about the Sigma 15-30mm or the Sigma 12-24mm lens. They both had decent reviews. Something told me to go back and check Fred Miranda to see if there were any reviews up for the new Canon 10-22mm. What I saw astonished me...
Comments such as:
"This is the best wide angle zoom lens I have ever used. The lens is sharp at every focal length. I love this lens."
"It is even sharper than my excellent 17-40L lens, and the zoom range is great. I love this lens!"
"This lens is so good, I am selling my 17-40mm L. It's the lens I've been waiting for. It is better than the 16-30mm L in sharpness"
The main gripe seems to be that for the cost, a lens hood should be included.
This lens might have a spot in my bag after all.
Also, I know this lens should really be compared to the Sigma 12-24mm as its not really the same category as the 17-40mm other than the 17-40mm being semi wide and the 10-22mm covering a short portion of that (17-22mm). It just amazed me to see people were dumping their 16-35mm and 17-40mm L lenses in favor of this...
[Edited 2005-01-23 13:42:29]