17-40L or EF-S 17-85 IS for 20D decision time

[mkitson]

I know it has been done to death so sorry in advance. I have been on the verge of ordering the 17-40L as the walkabout for my 20D, but then seen a few positive comments about the EF-s 17-85 IS. I have been reading threads till my head hurts so some direct advice to put me out of my misery please:confused: .

I used to have a film EOS with the EF 28-105mm USM lens on the front for years. This was the ideal zoom range for me. Mainly taking shots of the family and a bit of landscape so the zoom range on the 17-85 IS is appealing but will I see any difference in quality over the old 28-105 excepting the obvious addition of IS?

But the 17-85 IS does seem expensive, and in the same price bracket as the 17-40L. I like the idea of using some L glass for the first time but obviously will loose some versatility in the zoom range. Now if canon were to make a 17-85L I wouldn't have a problem!

Any views welcome.

The other lenses in my bag:
18-55 len kit
50mm f1.4
EF 75-300 f4-5.6 III

ps. the lens kit will not do, I am after something nearer to my 50mm in terms of sharpness.

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

Uh......... this is a tough one....... actually, no it's not. Go L.:cool: You'll be amazed by the quality. The EF-S 17-85mm is a DECENT lens. I've seen some good shots taken with it, but I've heard, and even seen first hand that it's soft on the edges of the frame. I played with it for a little while when I was considering buying it, and the quality just wasn't there. I simply wasn't impressed. When I latched a 17-40L onto my 20D though, woah was there a difference! It felt quality, it looked quality, and it took quality pics.:lol:

So, as you can see in my sig, I bought one! It's comming in tomorrow.:lol: I bought it because after testing it it seemed to have a very good focal range for both wide angle, and walk around lens potential. I could take snapshots of people in the store quite easily, and group shots even easier. Fantastic lens really. Your 50mm f/1.4 will go nicely with it too. Add a little more reach.

[lordjim]

My 2c advice: go with the 17-40L as it will likely be more durable. The EF-S may be good with the 20D but if the crop size changes with the successors to the 20D, the EF-S will loose its value. As you may know, the pro digital camera do not use the 1.6 crop so it would seem reasonable to expect that future prosumers cameras will benefit from the technology currently available to the pros. That beind said, the focal lengths of the 17-85 will be more versatile. So you may want to add a Tamron 28-75 to the 17-40L. There is also the Canon 24-70 L but it is far more expensive.

[ddelallata]

Another vote for the 17-40L. No one knows for sure if EF-S is here to stay or just a temporary solution to smaller sensors.

[arpi]

I am a newbie and I don't know much difference (learning). If it helps, this is a pic from the 17-85


http://www.scientificlinux.com/pics/tree2.jpg

[ayotnoms]

A former 17-85mm, current 17-40mm L owner here saying, "Go with the L quality"
:-)

[mkitson]

Well it's looking like the 17-40L is the one! Good point about the possible change in sensor size in the future. When forking out this kind of money would be nice to be sure it will be usable for a very long time.

Thanks for the posts so far.:)

[mvrekum]

A few weeks ago a bought the 24-70L and I only can say WOW. If the money is no problem, always get the L.

[Andy_T]

To supplement your 17-40/4.0 L, you can always get the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI.

With that, you have the 24-70 range covered with very comparable image quality.

Best regards,
Andy

[Croasdail]

If you are really good, I would go for the L, otherwise I would go for the lens with more range until you figure out what and how you really like to shoot. You may find you never play down at the 17mm end... or never go up high... but unless you have those options, you won't know. You can always sell it and move up.

[AjP]

if money not an issue, definately go with L

[Andy_T]

if money not an issue, definately go with L

Quite the contrary IMO ...
- the 17-40/4.0 is a very cheap L lens
- the 17-85 is quite a pricey consumer lens

I'd assume that the 17-40 will hold its value better, if you ever find yourself in the need to put it on the market again.

All that said, I went with the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI and the EF-S 18-55 ... still cheaper than the 17-85, but with better image quality.

(The same money could also buy you the EF-S 18-55 and the 28-135 IS ... cheaper/same price/image quality as 17-85, but better reach)

Just some thoughts :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[Brian Burns]

I have never used the 18-55 but I can say I've been very pleased with the results of the 17-40L. I don't think you can wrong with the L.

[ddelallata]

Well it's looking like the 17-40L is the one! Good point about the possible change in sensor size in the future. When forking out this kind of money would be nice to be sure it will be usable for a very long time.

Thanks for the posts so far.:)

A very long long long long time :)

[malla1962]

i was in the same boat and went for the 17-40 and love it.

[ggibbs1971]

I have the Tamron 28-75, and am possibly looking to get a wide angle zoom. I have ruled out the Canon 17-40, due to cost. I am thinking of the the Tokina 12-24 or the Tamron version. Either of these plus the 28-75 shouldn't cost much more than the "L".

Geoff

[DigiDi]

I love the 17-40L lens. Go for it! Beautiful photos and sharp! :)

[blue_max]

The 17-40 is a lovey lens and focusses really close (less than a foot). It is very versatile, going up to 40 which makes a reasonable portrait focal length on a 1.6x.

It is sharp and holds it's value well. I am very pleased with mine and am starting to use it more than I thought I would, being more of a telephoto sort of person.

Here is a sample of the close-up ability. I don't hear many people regretting buying it.

Graham

[mkitson]

Nice shot of the bird.

OK, thanks for all the comments, that has certainly eased my headache and I'm ordering a 17-40L tonight!

[mkitson]

OK. I've had my 17-40L for a little while now. Here's an example shot with the new toy.

[summerwind4]

i once had the 17-40 and the 24-70 for that matter...then comes the 17-85IS.
what a godsend, this lens has all the range, cuts down on switching lenses in the field (capturing dust in the event as well), and so far gets me any shot i want........

here are some 17-85IS samples..............

http://www.pbase.com/summerwind4/20d1785is

[I Simonius]

snip

So, as you can see in my sig, I bought one! It's comming in tomorrow.:lol: I bought it because after testing it it seemed to have a very good focal range for both wide angle, and walk around lens potential. I could take snapshots of people in the store quite easily, and group shots even easier.snip

make sure you test it when you get it. I had to take two back before I got a good'un

I think Canon is selling faster thanit can make lenses at the moment and the loss of QC shows :(

[I Simonius]

The 17-40 is a lovey lens and focusses really close (less than a foot). It is very versatile, going up to 40 which makes a reasonable portrait focal length on a 1.6x.

It is sharp and holds it's value well. I am very pleased with mine and am starting to use it more than I thought I would, being more of a telephoto sort of person.

Here is a sample of the close-up ability. I don't hear many people regretting buying it.

Graham

Thisis the first shot I have ever seen taken by a cat!

You must be a cat to have gotten that close with a 17-40! :lol:

[I Simonius]

OK. I've had my 17-40L for a little while now. Here's an example shot with the new toy.

excellent shot, you couldn't have posed that composition better! :D