This thread have evolved from a previous thread, http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16624.0
I have a Canon 7D and my wife has a 600D. We have on both the EF-S 18-200mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS lenses and find these pretty satisfactory general walk around lens (with the obvious compromise for the large focal length range).
I have been thinking of late of getting our first "L" lens. As enthusiast rather than professional photographers without a endless budget and the price of these lenses, we really don't want to waste money getting the wrong lens.
Our interests in photography are (not in any particular order):
1. Landscape and travel
2. Nature, animal, birds (not macro)
3. People (not portrait)
With this in mind I recently hired a EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM (as a potential landscape lens) but was underwhelmed when I compared it side-by-side with our 18-200mm using equivalent focal lengths and exposures. I was expecting this L lens (Canon's cheapest and most popular, so I read) to stand head and shoulders above the 18-200mm in image quality, color saturation, brightness, etc. But my (admittedly) amateur eye could not see the difference.
So my thinking now of an ultra wide EF-S lens to compliment our existing lenses. So thinking of either:
10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM; or
17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
I am leaning towards the 10-22m as this gives us a range we don't current have and would make a nice ultra wide lense on 7D and 600D for landscape.
Once again seeking comments, views and experiences especially from members who have used this lens.