EF-S 10-18 vs EFM 11-22

[davidra]

I think I know what I'm going to hear, but....I use an M50 for concert and performance shots. I already have the 10-18 that I've been using with an adaptor, and I'm not that happy with the results....they are passable, but barely. It's also a little bulky with the adaptor. Thinking about just getting the 11-22; I assume it's smaller, and possible sharper. Any insights?

 

[dpeete]

The answer depends on why aren’t you happy? If the shots are noisy, you are dealing with slow lenses on a crop sensor. The EF-M won’t fix that... you would do better with the 22mm or other lens with a faster aperture.

 

[davidra]

There's more to image quality than noise, right? First, because of the kind of shooting, a prime won't do. Second, the 10-18 on an adapter seems to have a fair amount of aberration, and it's not that sharp corner to corner. Believe me, I'd love to have a 1.2 11-22....I'll get one as soon as it's available.

 

[Dareshooter]

Given that you are unhappy with the 10-18 it's worth giving the 11-22 a whirl. FWIW I tried two 10-18's back a few years back when I had the Canon 100D /SL1 and they were both atrocious. I gave up on Ultra wides after that experience.

 

[Alan Sh]

I don't know if it will help in your decision, but here's some pictures I took with my 11-22 inside some caves - one at 3200 iso.

 

[davidra]

Very nice. That 22 wide open is pretty impressive, but a prime just wouldn't work for me. To me the 11-22 looks sharper than what I've been getting with the 10-18. Thanks....

 

[Advi]

I loved your cave pics. Awesome! I liked the 2nd the most.

But the first 2 where taken with the EF-M 22mm/2.0 :-O

 

[dpeete]

Yes, there is more than noise to consider. So why don’t you explain what you don’t like? Distortion? Soft corners? I was only guessing noise to help the conversation along.

 

[davidra]

As I said in my first response, the sharpness is not that good, especially in the corners, and there's a fair amount of chromatic aberration and some distortion. People seem to really like the 11-22, and it would be easier to pack. Just wanted to see if anyone had any comparisons. While I've been considering moving up to the R or the RF, the fact is that cropped frame works well for me in most situations....and the cost of R series lenses and the poor selection isn't that inviting right now. There are decent primes, but shooting a festival and people on stage is really hard to do with a prime.

 

[Ben Herrmann]

My opinion is that they're both superb wide angle optics. Granted, the 11-22 is one small zoom and Canon broke the mold when they made that one - it's that good.

But I also use (with an adapter) the EF-S 10-18, a highly inexpensive EF-S lens that I find exceptionally sharp. I keep one attached to an older M2 where it blends perfectly and the results I get from that combo are outstanding. In fact, I love that 10-18 so much that I purchased a Fringer EF to FX adapter and a 2nd copy of that lens, and use it on my Fuji X cameras because of the sharpness of the lens (with all electronic functions, AF, and IBIS completely compatible). My two copies are just that good!

But in getting back to the 11-22, you can't wrong on this deal - unless, of course, you get a bad copy. But with the 11-22, Canon has been really good about keeping great IQ consistency across various copies. Highly recommended.

 

[Andy01]

I think I know what I'm going to hear, but....I use an M50 for concert and performance shots. I already have the 10-18 that I've been using with an adaptor, and I'm not that happy with the results....they are passable, but barely. It's also a little bulky with the adaptor. Thinking about just getting the 11-22; I assume it's smaller, and possible sharper. Any insights?

No need to assume - data is available;

Loading…

www.the-digital-picture.com

The 11-22mm is smaller & lighter (significantly so when you add the adapter to the 10-18mm), and arguably one of Canon's sharpest UWA lenses.

Hard to go wrong with it.

Colin

 

[Alan Sh]

I loved your cave pics. Awesome! I liked the 2nd the most.

But the first 2 where taken with the EF-M 22mm/2.0 :-O

oops - sorry. Here's a couple more with the 11-22 at 3200.

 

[4xdog]

No insights on the comparison between EF-S and EF-M, but I have the EF-M 11-22mm and it's a terrific lens. I use it all the time on my M5. It's very sharp and has good color/flare control. It's compact on the M. I use the petal-shaped lens hood to protect it, which makes it a little bigger, but has probably saved some damage to the lens, too.

That said, the EF-M 22mm is a surprisingly capable little pancake. I've used it in low light with results that made me quite happy.

 

[cmcm789]

I went from 10-18 to 11-22 and found better sharpness and more consistent performance. Great lens and as it's so compact I carry it all the time. It feels much more solid too.

Adobe LR profile correction doesn't remove all distortion though. Before i sold the 10-18 i posted a couple of comparison images. Search "11-22 distortion" in the threads.

 

[going_digital]

I wish they would modify the 11-22 to an RF mount (cropped format) to fit on the R or RP. Slightly increase flange distance and change mechanical mount to RF, even keep the electronics the same (standard EF).

This would give us 17-35 mm zoom that fulfills the compact-lightweight value proposition of mirrorless. It has been frustrating that lenses for EOS-R are so large, even in the ultra wide-wide range. EF lenses are large and long, and this is made worse by the adapter. RF lenses are large and expensive.

The only compromise for RP would be 11mp resolution from the crop. So why didn’t I just get an M50 instead of RP? Good question, and maybe one Canon is or should be studying considering how popular the M50 is.

 

[davidra]

Every time I think about switching to an R or RP, I look at lenses and size. I do some shoots for a national festival website and have galleries of my own photos online.....and APS-C works just fine for these pics. I have done 20x30 blowups and bigger with very good quality. I did media on a 7 day cruise earlier this year, and shot the whole thing with an M50, and mostly with the 18-150 lens. I wish it were a faster combo, but I got some passable pictures with really high ISO's. Yes, noise at an ISO of greater than 10,000...but hey. Plus you hardly know you're carrying it.

 

[going_digital]

I do think I would have liked the M50 more than the RP during my last traveling vacation, because of the size and weight - the body is one thing, but the lens thing is a whole other matter. Canon should pay more attention to mirrorless APS-C, instead of focusing so much on FF. Maybe if Nikon brings out an APS Z, it will get Canon to pay attention. Fuji seems to be doing well with their APS which are all mirrorless. It could be the sweet spot in size, weight and pricing (bodies AND lenses). The strong sales of M50 is not an accident. I see a lot of younger generation people using APS mirrorless - these are where the business focus should be. If you talk about FF to them, they look at you like you are from a different planet.