Walk Around Lens

[C.S.I.]

Hi all,


I know this has been discussed up and down, in and out, etc etc.....

I know most at large adore both the 50 1.8 / 17-40 L. I dont know about you, but I seem to be seeing a trend where some folks are giving the 17-40 negative reviews, where this was once the standard among all landscape type lens', just about everyone was thrilled with this glass. Lately Ive been reading (numerous sources) where people were not getting the tack sharp images that were once the norm with this lens. I was hell bent myself in obtaining this lens, but at $800, Im beginning to get a little spooked. Ive even heard of people starting to go the Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom route for a walk around.

I dont know if its possible that there was a bad batch of 17-40's released recently or if the standards of the optics have changed (due to possibly marketing to every online retailer possible ie Dell???).....anyone agree or disagree or have had negative experiences lately?

Also feel free to mention your favorite walk around.......


Regards,
Bill

[KennyG]

I think it is more down to too much pixel peeping and lack of skill. We now have up to 22mp cameras in the hands of people that wouldn't know an F stop from a bus stop. Images are bigger, get viewed at least at 100% on screen and if they are not perfect, of course it is the lens, must be, the photographer can't be to blame, just look how much money he spent to get it right.

Seriously though, I do not believe there are any major issues with the 17-40L and most of what you read/hear comes from people who don't have a clue.

I am not a fan of the phrase 'walkaround lens' as I picture a 50mm with legs, but I'm strange like that. A general purpose lens to me would be the 24-70 2.8L.

[defordphoto]

I've got to agree with Kenny. especially the f-stop / bus stop comparison. I have the 17-40L and it's a sweet lens. And I don't have a "walk-around" lens. If I'm shooting people closeup or landscapes then the 17-40 is the walk-around. If I'm at the track, then the 400, 100-400 and 70-200 are my walk-arounds.

[booggerg]

Hi all,
I know this has been discussed up and down, in and out, etc etc.....

Then why regurgitate a well digested topic. Not being mean here, just springboarding from your own thoughts.

Do a search dude.

[ssim]

The lens that stays on my camera the most is my 24-70 f/2.8 L. It is deadly sharp and is a good general purpose lens. When I was hunting for the wider zoom lens I opted for the 16-35. Again deadly sharp but both of these are expensive but given the quality you can attain quite worth it, imo.

[scottbergerphoto]

Then why regurgitate a well digested topic. Not being mean here, just springboarding from your own thoughts.

Do a search dude.
You may not be mean, but your response is certainly rude and obnoxious. It was also gratuitous. You are free to not respond if you don't have something constructive to say. The poster was already self concious about posting a question. Your response only made that worse. KennyG and Jim Deford(RFM) are respected photographers on this board and they didn't mind responding.
Scott

[Cadwell]

Something wrong with the 17-40L? No, I don't think so. I have one and consider it a very fine lens. I love it for shooting in the pits and paddock and at motorshows. I don't think there's a standard definition of "walkaround lens". For me, it depends where I am. At a race track for example it may well be the 100-400L. On the odd occasion that I do the "tourist bit" with friends/family etc I would tend to use my Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. This isn't because I think it's a better lens than the 17-40L; it's because I consider it a more useful focal range for that purpose.

[C.S.I.]

Then why regurgitate a well digested topic. Not being mean here, just springboarding from your own thoughts.

Do a search dude.


First off, thank you for responding all...points well taken.

Second, dude, I did do a search of the forum. From what I was able to find, the 17-40 fit the bill for most applications as a walk around. My question was the current reliability of what was being touted the best walk around lens, i.e. problems people were having with this lens.

Thanks Scott BTW