Reading mode: Light Dark

Is the 11-22 worth the money?

Go to last post
I've had mine (on my 300) for about a week and must say that in all respects but one it is a far superior lens than the 14-45. It is sharper, gives me a real edge in some of the construction photography I do and has a great feel. However, it generally means that in many situations I must haul along at least one extra lens if I want an even modest telephoto effect, something that is very important when I do railway photography. In that situation I would probably slap the 14-45 back on because I don't have time to change lenses. I write this while on a business trip where I need to travel very, very photographically light, but want to do some event photography for a conference I am running and so am using the 11-22 (which gives me great coverage and an an extra stop or so) and a prime OM 50mm f 1.8 for a 100m reach shooting about f2.8 or a tad wider when I need it. I do think that the 11-22 will end up on the camera almost full time.

It's been a great purchase so far.
 
How does the 11-22 do on indoor flash family photography?
--



God bless our troops!
 
Alan,
The 8mm FE is fixed @ 8mm. I'm not sure what you're asking for.

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
'Bootstrap?'
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
Eschew obfuscation.
The frumious Bandersnatch



40% of what I say is 60% accurate.
 
It does fine, just need to watchout for distortion-if possible keep it level & don't push it in someones face.

ad
--
...capture some images...&...have some fun...
 
Bill_Turner said:
Alan,
The 8mm FE is fixed @ 8mm. I'm not sure what you're asking for.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to find out what the biggest CIRCULAR image is on the 8mm --- the circle that just touches the top and bottom of the frame (in landscape mode). The easiest way to find this is to aim the camera at some fixed point, and then turn the camera until the object just disappears. Note the angle and multiply by two.
 
The built-in flash on the E300 makes a shadow at 11mm, even with the lens hood off.

You'll need a flash -- the FL36 is fine --- but you'll probably need a diffuser to widen its coverage.
 
Thanks for picking that one up Alan. Have never tried it with the inbuilt flash with the FL50 it's fine it has a built in drop down diffuser to use at the 11mm end. Does the FL36 have one as well?

As for the hood not sure if it would impact as it is so narrow, must try it one day & see if causes a shadow.

ad
--
...capture some images...&...have some fun...
 
Alan,

The 8mm FE produces an image that fills the frame. There is no "circle" that eliminates and part of the image.
You're perhaps referring to aftermarket adapters that create a different image.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but in my 8mm images, there is no "circle."

--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
'Bootstrap?'
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
Eschew obfuscation.
The frumious Bandersnatch



40% of what I say is 60% accurate.
 
I think olympus have good value at low end lens.
The higher end, the lower value for the money.

Still recommand middle class(eg 1122) even they are a bit expensive.
 
aussiedavid said:
Thanks for picking that one up Alan. Have never tried it with the
inbuilt flash with the FL50 it's fine it has a built in drop down
diffuser to use at the 11mm end. Does the FL36 have one as well?
Click to expand...
Yes -- I just pointed the E300 & 11-22 (at 11) & FL36 at a wall (close up), with the diffuser down.

There is a slight fall-off all along the bottom edge, which also shows at 14mm.

With the camera away from the wall there's enough bounced light for it not to show up.

I put on my Lumiquest softbox and then it's fine.

The hood is clear in all cases -- no shadow.
 
Bill_Turner said:
Alan,
The 8mm FE produces an image that fills the frame. There is no
"circle" that eliminates and part of the image.
You're perhaps referring to aftermarket adapters that create a
different image.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but in my 8mm images, there is no
"circle."
Click to expand...
I want to crop out the biggest possible full circle.
 
Alan this might sound silly but would it be 3/4 of 180 degrees? ie 135 degrees or is it not linear?

ad
--
...capture some images...&...have some fun...
 
The 11-22 is a fantastic lens, and as has been pointed out, actually a fair bit wider at the wide end than just the 3mm difference from the 14 mm would suggest. After all, the difference between a 28mm equivalent and a 22mm equivalent lens is quite substatial. However, iot does not work well with your (and my) E-500's built in flash becauits length and diameter produce a substantial shadow at the bottom centre of the image frame,
--
erichK
saskatoon, canada
 
fivehole said:
Thanks for the helpfull info. I was at the camera shop on saturday
"playing" with a bunch of the lenses. The 7-14 was awesome, not the
price though.
Click to expand...
While the 7-14mm is a magnificent achievement, it is also, for most mere mortals, a less generally useful and usable lens than the smaller, faster, lighter, less extreme 11-22.

(I've previously referred to my own experiences with very wide vs ultrawide angles in other threads: to summarize: love and often use fast 24mm; found that big, slow, heavy tricky to level and compose 17mm seldom left my camera bag.)

--
erichK
saskatoon, canada
 
wei chih said:
I think olympus have good value at low end lens.
The higher end, the lower value for the money.

Still recommand middle class(eg 1122) even they are a bit expensive.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the 35-100, the 50 or the 300mm isn't worth the money? I have to disagree. Working primary with the 35-100, I just love that lens, and I find it worth any dime spend on it. Its heavy, its expensive, but the results are excellent, and the F2 is priceless imho

--
Jens Holm
 
Dave... Not linear.
--
Regards,
(afka Wile E. Coyote)
'Bootstrap?'
Bill
PSAA
Equipment in profile.
Eschew obfuscation.
The frumious Bandersnatch



40% of what I say is 60% accurate.
 
Theo Keijzers said:
Rennie Petersen said:
If the above image whets your appetite, there are lots of other
pictures made with the 11-22 in the gallery that this picture is
from.

http://renniep.smugmug.com/gallery/1985645/1/101261297/Large
Click to expand...
Nice photo-story of the hotel in France Rennie, I like it.
Click to expand...
Theo,

Thank you.

Almost all (maybe all) of the pictures were taken using the 11-22 lens. I had taken some pictures to try the lens out and because the hotel was an interesting object to shoot. Then I got the idea of doing a complete photo-story about the hotel, and took a bunch of additional pictures to make the coverage fairly complete.

Rennie

--
Olympus E-500, Sony F717, Sony P100, Canon S820
http://renniep.smugmug.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top