L lenses also have weather sealing and superior construction. From the only picture I've seen of the 10-22mm, it looks to be constructed much like Canon's other midrange consumer zooms, like the 20-35mm or 100-300mm. While it's true that in the very early years, Canon released the 100-300mm and 50-200mm L lenses in essentially the same package as the consumer versions, that hasn't been the case for nearly 15 years.
Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Gary Fisher > Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 3:00 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: EOS The EF-S 10-22mm Lens - L class or not? > > Hi All, > > OK, it's not classed as an L lens (obviously!) but my > recollection of Canon's definition of an L class lens is a > lens that contains one or more of the following: > > - ground aspherical element (not moulded or > replicated) > - fluorite element (CaF2) > - super UD element > - UD element > - the red ring at the front (ok just joking > on that one!) > > The Canon FAQ at Photozone defines an L lens as a lens that > features "a combination of at least one ground aspherical, > UD, SUD and/or > CaF2 elements". That "and/or" is confusing. > > The 28-70 f2.8L for example, doesn't contain a fluorite > element, just a single ground aspherical. > So do the 24 TS-E L, 85f1.2L, 35f1.4L and 14f2.8L lenses. All > the other L series lenses I could find specs on have 2 or > more UD (or whatever) elements... > > L series lenses aren't classified by build quality > - the 100-300 f5.6L is brilliant optically (with a fluorite > and a UD element) but build quality is pretty so-so and > focusing speed is likewise. > > The specs on the 10-22 include a Super UD element and 2 > aspherics. I haven't seen what type of aspherics, but I > thought the Super-UD alone was enough to qualify as an L > class lens - Canon's own literature rates CaF2 and S-UD as > almost equal, and S-UD the equal of 2xUD elements. > > Obviously I'm wrong :) But why: does anyone know? > > In any case - those specs give pretty good reason to expect > (hope?) that the optical performance will be at least good, > maybe better than good. > The appearance of the lens (especially from the hi-res > photos) indicates that it's likely to be pretty well > constructed. The price also underlines/emphasises those impressions. > > Here's hoping! > > Cheers > Gary * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
