EF-S prime, say, between 9 to 12mm ...

[jim_rais]

<p align="justify">Not meant to "fuel" discussion prime vs. zoom, but I think it will be nice if there's also a EF-S prime - say between 9 to 12mm - for prime fanatics, despite the 10-22 good quality. Just a thought (and wishful thinking). </p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Not too likely as it would be expensive and a really poor seller. However, Sigma comes closest with the 8mm F3.5 EX DG.</p>

[jim_rais]

<p>The Sigma 3.5/8mm EX DG, isn't it a fish eye, Puppy? I don't mean a fish eye, but just UWA prime. But, yes, you're right. It would be an expensive one.</p>

[bueh]

<p>The next best thing for us prime lens shooters seems to be the Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8 lens which I have. Very convenient to use with Pentax' image stabilized dSLRs!</p>

[richard_oleson]

<p>That would be nice ... the 10-22 is huge to haul around, I'd use a prime instead if there was one.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>The Sigma 8mm is a circular fisheye for full frame bodies.</p>

<p>I have a Nikon 14/2.8, the equivalent EF-S to Canon's 14/2.8, would have to be a 8.5mm rectilinear lens. For ultrawide photography you are always better off with the largest format that you can afford.</p>

[bill_fouche]

<p>I'd like to "second the motion." I have the 10-22 and like it a lot. But it is too big, too heavy, and not great in low light without a tripod. In fact, I am so interested in having a bright, high-quality wide-angle prime lens (my ideal focal length would be somewhere around 14 or 15), that I am considering selling ALL of my Canon gear and changing to the Pentax system, as I will never have an interest in "full size" sensor DSLR. </p>

[bueh]

<p>Bill, second-hand Pentax dSLRs are so inexpensive that adding a K10D and one or two lenses should not break the bank. But I am too considering fully abandoning Canon as Pentax' in-body stabilization is so good and useful for me. Even the "old" K10D has so many useful features that I miss on my EOS 20D that it is becoming my main camera.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>This is guarenteed to be a lens that Canon won't make. Canon is working hard to destinguish its pro (read FF and L) gear from its amatuer stuff (read APS-C and EF-S). So my guess is it won't be issuing any more EF-S primes. Pity really.<br>

Even the EF-S 60 macro was in my view a mistake as it probably would have sold much better if they had spent a little more and made it FF.</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>the 10-22 is huge to haul around</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think it's rather small and light.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[bjscharp]

It's a pity the Pentax 15mm doesn't have an aperture ring, otherwise a simple K-to-EF adapter would give us canon users a very nice lens to play with.

[yakim_peled1]

<p>It's a pity the Pentax 15mm doesn't have better <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/pentax_15_4_p15/page4.asp">IQ</a>. :-(</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

[steven_moseley1]

<p>If you believe all that DPReview says then......</p>

<p>I take ALL lens testers/reviewers/pixel peepers opinions with a VERY large portion of doubt.</p>

<p>If you want digital primes then Pentax are the only game in town.</p>