12-24 or 17-40

[salinaale]

sorry if this may be an old question... i'd like to change the kit lens of my 20D... and it may be a 12/24 sigma or a 17-40 .
Any suggestions? the 12-24 is very wide and the 17-40 is a L lenses... i'm very confused... is there anyone that can help me??
Thanks and sorry for my terrible english! :o
Ale

[cactusclay]

The 12 - 24 is only going to be a 38.4 mm on the long end, which might tend to limit you for a walk around lens to replace the kit lens. I have never had one of those lens, so I can't say good or bad, but I do own the 17-40 and although it only reaches to 64 mm on the long end-with the 1.6 crop factor- I have found that I use it more than any other lens at weddings. I'm pretty sure you will not be disappointed with the image and build quality of the 17-40, but if you really want the wide angle, then you could always get something like a 50 1.8 for shooting people. Hope that helps.

[Jesper]

Well, what do you want: are you looking for a wide angle lens, or a lens that's more in the "normal" range?

If it's the first, I would have a look at the Canon EF-S 10-22 instead of the Sigma 12-24. The Canon is a better, sharper lens according to this review (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-10-22mm-test.shtml) and I think it's about the same price or even a little bit cheaper than the Sigma.

If it's the second, the 17-40 L is an excellent choice for the 20D. In fact, the 17-40 is my most used lens on my 10D.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Disadvantage to the 10-22mm of course being you can't use it with film or some other digitals.. and actually I think it's more expensive than the Sigma?

I like my 17-40mm and have never felt it was not wide enough on the 10D/20D.. in fact I find that most times I shoot with it I am not even set to 17mm...

But if you need that width,. that's when I would look to either the 10-22mm or Sigma

The upsides to the 10-200mm are it is extremely well mead,. incorporating many of the design elements that go into Canon's high priced "L" lenses,. high speed USM focus motors, aspherical and UD lens elemnets etc.. in truth given the price to match,. (more than the 17-40mm f/4L) this is Canon's first "L" EFS,.. whether they were willing to call it that or not.

[Tom W]

The 17-40 is a great lens. The 10-22 is gaining a great reputation as well, though it is EF-S.
The Sigma 12-24 has a good reputation, though there is a fair amount of variation from one lens to another - Reichmann got a bad copy for his test, I think.

The real issue here is how wide you want to go. 17 mm makes a good solid wide angle on the 1.6 sensor, while 12 is a super-wide. Its just a matter of feeling out your own needs.

[Lesmac]

Another consideration , and might be relevant, the 17-40 is an extremely robust lens, important if you are taking landscapes, and bouncing your gear around mountains etc. Sigma lenses (IMO) just can't stand this punishment.
It's the lens that is used most on my 1DS MKII, and previously on 10D.
It's a great lens, and would recommend it.
Some samples with this lens in my gallery if you are interested.

Les
http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/

[bubba zanetti]

Les
http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/

Les ..your shots are great. You get a very rich deep colour into them.

The few at the bottom of the Yorkshire album...(the trees alone in the water) are they with the 17-40 ?

Sorry for the brief hijack fellas.

Gus

[Lesmac]

Yes, they are

[malla1962]

Yes, they areorderd my 17-40 3 days ago and looking at your pics im glad i did,those pics are amazing.im allso thinking of geting a set of lee nd grads
what do you think of the lee filter system?do you use lee?

[salinaale]

The 12 - 24 is only going to be a 38.4 mm on the long end, which might tend to limit you for a walk around lens to replace the kit lens. I have never had one of those lens, so I can't say good or bad, but I do own the 17-40 and although it only reaches to 64 mm on the long end-with the 1.6 crop factor- I have found that I use it more than any other lens at weddings. I'm pretty sure you will not be disappointed with the image and build quality of the 17-40, but if you really want the wide angle, then you could always get something like a 50 1.8 for shooting people. Hope that helps.


Thanks!
You're right... in fact i also have a 50/1.8 and a 75-300....
I've also a 24-70/2.8 Sigma but i want to change it... it does not satisfy me at all... to much flare...and with a 1.6 crop factor it becomes a 38-112!!

Ale

[salinaale]

Another consideration , and might be relevant, the 17-40 is an extremely robust lens, important if you are taking landscapes, and bouncing your gear around mountains etc. Sigma lenses (IMO) just can't stand this punishment.
It's the lens that is used most on my 1DS MKII, and previously on 10D.
It's a great lens, and would recommend it.
Some samples with this lens in my gallery if you are interested.

Les
http://lesmclean.photoblink.com/


Very very great shots.... goodness knows if one day i'll be able to do something like this.
Thanks for your answer... i'm nearly convinced to buy the 17-40.
Ale

[Lesmac]

orderd my 17-40 3 days ago and looking at your pics im glad i did,those pics are amazing.im allso thinking of geting a set of lee nd grads
what do you think of the lee filter system?do you use lee?
Hi Malla
No I use the cokin Z pro filtersystem (ND grads)with a Lee Holder.
I used to use the cokin P filter system grads, but the Z system is more versatile.

[Andy D]

17 - 40 for me..... ;)