Close up capabilities of the 11-22


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#1
Just got my 11-22 today and since its such a gloomy day in Manchester, I had to settle for taking photos of some flowers instead. I'm quite surprise at the close up abilities of the 11-22! In a pinch, it can probably double as a macro lens.

Here are some crop and resized images. Raw of course.





Hopefully, the weather is better tomorrow and I can test it out on some urban landscapes.

So far, the lens is very impressive
 

hhho

Senior Member
Nov 2, 2003
2,145
0
0
West
Visit site
#2
Hi! Evilmerlin
Nice capture of these flowers.
i think it is wide angle lens not a macro lens
the 14-45mm or 40 -150mm lenses you have can do the same thing.
how much you pay for it? it must be cheaper in UK
Is it very much different from 14-45mm lens in term of its performance?
Cheers,
 

Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#3
The 40-150 would be hard pressed to get that close to a subject considering its minimum focusing distance is quite large. The 14-45 could do it with a larger magnification but its got a longer minimum focusing distance.

Yah, it is a wide angle lens but in a pinch it can work to take some close up. Performance wise, I can't say yet as I have not really tested it out. But from initial impressions, it looks really good.

I got the lens mainly because I wanted a faster and wider lens and didn't see the purpose in owning a 14-54mm just for the extra speed. With this lens, I cover everything from 22 - 300mm in 3 lens. The 11-22 can even double as my low-light lens by simply upping the ISO to 200/400.
 

nightpiper

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2003
2,152
0
0
#4
Evilmerlin said:
Here are some crop and resized images. Raw of course.
So far, the lens is very impressive

i like it 'well done'. :bsmilie: nice shot & great colours!! :thumbsup: i m also eyeing on this baby for the wide angle, good for travelling & scenic shots. :)
 

tomcat

Senior Member
Nov 7, 2003
5,515
11
0
63
Visit site
#5
Looks good. Can see quite a lot of details in the white petals in the first shot. I am eyeing this lens too as it is only slightly more expensive than the 50mm macro lens. This lens is however more useful for landscape shots and I don't travel very often. Maybe I would get one just before my next holiday trip ....

To use the other lenses as a macro alternative, the extension tube EX-25 should be considered. Despite the instructions which imply that it could not work or autofocus well on any lens other than the 50mm macro, I found that it could work on the 14-45mm and 40-150mm lenses, although the working range is a bit limited on these 2 lenses. Perhaps it could make the 11-22mm a even better macro lens? :dunno:
 

Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#6
Well, I'm still waiting to see what other options there are for macro lens. No doubt the 50/2 is a great lens but my main focus is usually on landscapes so thats a low priority for me.

Maybe if I can get a EX-25 to try out....hmm...

Here's another shot with the 11-22. The building is the main admistrative building of the university formerly known as UMIST. Taken handheld @ 1/50 and F/2.8 ISO200

 

tomcat

Senior Member
Nov 7, 2003
5,515
11
0
63
Visit site
#7
Hi Evilmerlin,

I was wondering if it is worth while spending more money to get an extra 3mm in wide angle. Could you take a couple of shots of the same scene at 11mm and 14mm (either with the same lens or with the 14-45mm lens) to illustrate the difference that could be achieved. Thanks.
 

Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#8
The difference isn't much frankly but I'll take a comparison shot and post it tomorrow.
The main thing about it is that its faster, weather sealed(not much use considering I'm using the E-300....) and the solid edge to edge sharpness all the way to the telephoto end.
 

kimbo

New Member
Jun 3, 2004
170
0
0
#9
The 11-22 is not compatible with the EX-25. I personally feel there are too much overlap between the 11-22 and the 14-54. However, for my recent trip out of singapore, I have to utilize the 24mm on the OM to handle wide angle shots. Bought the 11-22 shortly after. If I have the money, 7-14 is ideal.. until then 11-22 is a fair substitute.. especially if you're the travelling kind..
 

Jul 26, 2002
1,376
0
0
Woodlands
#10
Well..I don't own the 14-54, so its no big loss to me. Rather, if I had gotten the 14-54, it would be a big loss as the 14-45 is pretty much the same as the 14-54.
 

chancy

New Member
Dec 16, 2003
556
0
0
Northern Singapore
Visit site
#11
Hello EvilMerlin,

I am drawn by the pastel petal textures of both samples. Thanks for sharing.

Personally, I find practicality in the 11-22 range for interior people photography (also street photography). As a HDB heartlander, 28mm is the minimum needed to cover group or environmental portrait photography in households. the 21-24mm range takes in more of the environment without having the photographer to stand back or worry for perspective distortion. When photo opportunities arise suddenly, the added reach (not much admittedly) provided by the 35-44mm perspective allows us to draw our subjects closer in a hurry without worrying about 'big nose' effect if say we have the ZD7-14, which may necessitate a lens swap and a consequent loss of candid moments.

But surely a good photographer could work around this & I'm sure there must be arguments for the 7-14mm :)

Just to share a point for for those considering this lens.

Cheers,
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom