amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

For travel, the EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 STM is one of the smaller, lighter ultrawide lenses. It's also one of the few with Image Stabilization and one of the least expensive ($279). It is somewhat plasticky, like many of Canon's more entry-level lenses, but has very good image quality. It uses 67mm filters.

Canon's EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is an older model (intro'd in 2004), but still one of the very best ultrawides made by anyone. It's a bit bigger, heavier and about twice as expensive as the 10-18mm, but as you can see it has a wider range of focal lengths and is about 2/3 stops faster across the entire range. It doesn't have IS, but does have USM focus drive. Build quality is solid Canon "mid grade", much like your 70-300mm and 18-135mm. The 10-22mm USM uses 77mm filters.

These aren't L-series lenses, so they don't come with lens hoods. But I highly recommend getting the matched hoods because all lenses benefit from using them, even though both these ultrawides are among the most flare resistant lenses of that type. The EW-73C that the 10-18mm STM lens uses is a reasonably compact "tulip" style hood that adds $23 to the cost of the lens. The 10-22mm uses EW-83E lens hood, which is "tulip" style too, but a fairly large diameter. That's my one complaint about this lens, the hood is a bit hard to store in some camera bags. The lens is so flare resistant that I thought maybe I could get by without the hood (although I always use them on all my other lenses). However, after a few test shots I decided the hood was too important to leave at home, so I carry and use it along with the lens.

You really can't go wrong with either of these lenses. The cheaper 10-18mm might make for a good travel lens due to it's smaller size and lighter weight. It's nice that it has IS, too... though I don't consider that as important on an UWA lens as I do on a telephoto. The 10-22mm is better built and will probably prove to be more durable over the long run.

See Bryan Carnathan's The-digital-picture.com and Ken Rockwell's websites for more detailed info, sample images, test comparisons, etc.

I'd wager you'll find yourself using the ultrawide and your 18-135mm the most on your trip. But, you never know and it doesn't add a lot of bulk or weight to carry the 70-300mm too.

CanonTom Loc: Birmingham

I have the 10-18. Plastic but who cares? Just be careful with it. Inexpensive and the Image quality is extremely good.

Photocraig

The EF-S 10-18 is excellent and inexpensive. It is small and light and has IS and also focuses close--they even call it MACRO.

So nice I bought it twice--don't ask.

I agree on leaving teh 70-300 home. It is a tank.

travisdeland Loc: deland, FL

Your 18-135 is a crop sensor lens-there is no factor

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

I second your opinion.

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Canon EF-S 10-18 mm. You can get it for around $279.00 new. I have gotten really great results with it.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Nothing else comes close in optical quality except the 11-24mm L Canon lens.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

There is a crop factor for the lens. Crop factor is nothing more then a comparison of the view angle of any particular focal length when used on cameras with different size sensors. Even though crop factor is almost always a reference to the difference between an APS-C sensor and a full frame sensor it can actually be applied to any two dissimilar sensors. That 18-135 on an APS-C body produces the same field of view as 29-216 would on a full frame. What does not change is the focal length of a lens. Many lenses will fit both APS-C and FF bodies, but, the focal length is always what is indicated on the lens.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

If money and weight is an issue, you should consider the Canon EFs 10-18mm. It's inexpensive and light, but it's excellent optically.

TV714

I'm beginning to realize that the max aperture of f/3.5 on the 10mm-22mm or the f/4.5 on the 10mm-18mm Canons might be limiting in small non-well lit places. In that case, I should broaden my search for a good (not too expensive) UWA with a larger aperture. I've had several suggestions here about brands other than Canon. A Tokina and a Samyang, I believe it was. Any other favorites out there?

Thanks in advance for any advice,
Tom

bigtex2000 Loc: Arlington, TX

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8........great lens that is relatively inexpensive. Very sharp and well built.