DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Optically how good is the EF-M 11-22 IS STM lens?

Started May 24, 2017 | Polls
Alastair Norcross
Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 9,874
Re: Optically how good is the EF-M 11-22 IS STM lens?
1

Franz Kerschbaum wrote:

Think I was not clear enough: the ef-s 10-22 is a very good lens (I owned both)! The 17-40 is in my view not deserving the red ring...

Sorry, yes, I misunderstood your post. I owned the 17-40 for a couple of years, when I first got into digital with the original Digital Rebel in 2004. I quite liked it, but that camera was only 6MP, so it didn't really stress the lens. If I wanted a FF ultra wide zoom these days, I'd go for the 16-35 F4L.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R7 Canon EOS R6 Mark II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +24 more
beagle1 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,740
Re: Optically how good is the EF-M 11-22 IS STM lens?

nnowak wrote:

lilBuddha wrote:

Franz Kerschbaum wrote:

Think I was not clear enough: the ef-s 10-22 is a very good lens (I owned both)! The 17-40 is in my view not deserving the red ring...

Perhaps you had a bad copy. Regardless you are entitled to your opinion, though it isn't shared by the majority of reviewers or others who have owned it.

I am not sure what majority you are referring to, but the 17-40mm is not a highly regarded lens. The 17-40mm looked good years ago when it was compared to the original 16-35mm f2.8 and 16-35mm f2.8 II. All of those lenses were mediocre, the 17-40mm was just a little less mediocre. This was back in the day when Canon had a reputation for being incapable of designing a good wide angle lens compared to Nikon.

Time moves on and 14 years later, the 17-40mm is no where near the quality of any of modern Canon wide angle zooms. The lowly 10-18mm STM on crop easily trounces the 17-40mm on full frame.

right, the lowly refurbished 10-18 is very good

Marco Nero
Marco Nero Veteran Member • Posts: 7,582
few more examples...
2

Hombre de Maiz wrote:

To those who own or have owned the EF-M 11-22mm IS STM lens, the following question:

In terms of image quality, how good is the EF-M 11-22mm IS STM lens?

It may be worth mentioning that it's not just the clarity of this lens (which is quite sharp to begin with).... but another major feature is how the wide angle produces dramatic angles. It's not a fisheye but it can produce some interesting results (re: distortion) when you take perspective into account...  With closeups of people and pets, this can produce an interesting look to your portfolio or Instagram pages. The downside usually applies to taking portraits of people up close or towards the peripheral ranges of the lens when shooting wide.  If they are not Quite a few people in real estate photography seem to be picking up this lens. 
.

Monopod used

Tripod used

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Marco Nero.

 Marco Nero's gear list:Marco Nero's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS Ra Canon EOS R6 Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 Canon RF 85mm F1.2L USM +20 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads