Is the Canon EF-S 10-22mm a worthwhile upgrade from the 18-55mm kit lens for nature photography?
Asked 1/3/2011
4 views
2 answers
0
I shoot with a Canon T2i/550D and currently use the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens. I mostly photograph nature and am considering adding the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5. Since it would be a significant purchase, I’d like to know whether it would offer real benefits beyond just better image quality. Is it a good complement to the kit lens for landscapes and general outdoor scenes, or would another type of lens make more sense for nature photography?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
9
Aside from the better quality of the EF-S 10-22mm lens, it offers a significantly wider angle of view. So much so that at 10mm, there is a fair amount of distortion. An ultra wide angle can be an extremely powerful tool, particularly when you want to get really close to a foreground subject, and still capture great breadth and depth to your scene. The 18mm wide end of your kit lens can't hold a stick to the 10mm wide end of the 10-20mm EF-S.
A simple comparison can be made between these lenses and their EF (full frame) counterparts, as well. Sometimes that can be helpful in making a decision. Since Canon entry-level DSLR's use APS-C 1.6x crop sensors, it is easy to calculate the full-frame equivalents. The 18-55mm EF-S kit lens behaves like a 28-88mm EF lens. The standard EF counterpart would be the superb 24-70mm L series lens. Similarly, the 10-22mm EF-S lens behaves like a 16-35mm EF lens. The direct EF counterpart for that would be the 16-35mm L series lens. Canon's EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM is one of their widest zoom lenses, with the only wider one being the new EF 8-15mm f/4 L USM FishEye lens. That should put the EF-S 10-22mm lens in perspective.
Here are some links to photos that make use of ultra wide angles to get extremely close to their foreground, while still encompassing great scene breadth and depth. I think the last link in this sequence particularly demonstrates the power of wide angle:
- Twilight Floating Memories: 16mm/APS-C
- This is a little beyond the limit of your 18-55, for reference
- Down in Sinkhole Land III: 10mm/APS-C
- High Tatras National Park: 17mm/Full Frame
- A Small Oasis: 10mm/APS-C
- A Break in the Storm: 10mm/APS-C
- Korpudalur Sunset: 10mm/APS-C
Originally by user124. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user124
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—if your idea of nature photography includes landscapes, forests, waterfalls, and other scenic views, the EF-S 10-22mm can be a very worthwhile addition. Its main advantage is not just image quality, but a much wider field of view than the 18-55mm. On your T2i, 10mm feels dramatically wider than 18mm and can create immersive images with strong foreground emphasis and a sense of depth.
It works especially well when you can get close to a foreground subject while still fitting in the surrounding scene. That said, ultra-wide lenses can show noticeable distortion at the wide end, so they’re a creative tool rather than a universal replacement.
If by “nature” you mean birds, wildlife, or distant animals, a telephoto lens would usually be more useful than a 10-22mm.
So: the 10-22mm is an excellent complement to your 18-55mm for landscapes and scenic nature photography, but it serves a different purpose than a telephoto wildlife lens.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
For a Canon T2i, is the 18-55 or 18-135 kit lens worth buying if I plan to add other lenses?
Is the Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS STM worth it over the 18-55mm III for a Canon 200D?
Should I keep the Canon EF-S 10-18mm for landscapes and night sky photos on a Rebel T3i?
Why are both 10-22mm and 24-70mm called wide-angle lenses on a Canon T2i?
Should I upgrade from a Canon Rebel XTi body or invest in better lenses first?