Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 26 Nov 2011 (Saturday) 03:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

17-40L f/4 any drawbacks?

 
Max ­ Powers
Goldmember
1,114 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
     
Dec 12, 2011 03:21 |  #31

Like everyone said...Great on full frame, not so great on crop.

I am getting one today for my new full frame, but when I had a crop, I debated between this and the tamron 17-50 2.8 and got the tamron. I'd do the same thing again.


Nikon D600
-Samyang 14mm f2.8 -Nikon 50mm 1.8G -Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR
-Nikon 24-120 f3.5-5.6 D
flickr (external link)||500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,195 posts
Likes: 73
Joined Mar 2007
     
Dec 12, 2011 06:30 |  #32

love it on my 5D2, i have a very sharp copy, plenty wide at 17mm, it is my lightest and smallest len, great for hiking.


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
montroyal
Member
220 posts
Joined Jul 2011
     
Dec 14, 2011 16:25 |  #33

just received my 17-40 today

really fast, really sharp, really quiet

i'm impressed, f4 is not an issue,bokeh is nice

lens correction by software is easy and showing good results

a great friend for my 5dm2 :)


Canon 5D Mark III, Canon 24-70 2.8L, Canon 70-200 4L IS, Canon 17-40 4L, flash Canon 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MOkoFOko
nut impotent and avoiding Geoff
Avatar
19,889 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Dec 14, 2011 16:28 |  #34

it's plenty good on crop and works as a standard zoom walkaround. Good for video. Not so good for low-light.

It's a good investment over EF-S, just in case you ever go APS-H or FF!!


My Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lancebroad
Senior Member
Avatar
396 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane, AU
     
Dec 14, 2011 16:41 |  #35

I used it on a 30D and I loved it. If your shooting landscape, it will be a great lens, you wont need anything faster than f/4 as you will stop it down, so it suits perfectly.


Canon 6D | Canon 7D | Canon 5D mkII | 14L MK II | 24-70L | 70-200 f/2.8L | 100-400L | 400L f/2.8 | Zenitor 15mm | 580EX II |
http://facebook.com/la​nceb.avgeek (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tsmith
Formerly known as Bluedog_XT
Avatar
10,429 posts
Likes: 26
Joined Jul 2005
Location: South_the 601
     
Dec 14, 2011 17:13 |  #36

Max Powers wrote in post #13530793 (external link)
Like everyone said...Great on full frame, not so great on crop.

I am getting one today for my new full frame, but when I had a crop, I debated between this and the tamron 17-50 2.8 and got the tamron. I'd do the same thing again.

"Not so great on crop"

Why post such when that's totally false information?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
james_in_baltimore
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD
     
Dec 15, 2011 13:49 |  #37

Tsmith wrote in post #13545702 (external link)
"Not so great on crop"

Why post such when that's totally false information?

I think he may mean to say is that there are better choices on a crop camera. I would personally recommend the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS. It is a stop faster, has much more range and IS. I loved that lens when my primary camera was a crop and still miss it sometimes - as there is no full frame equivalent. If you would rather have an L, then the 17-40 is an ok choice.

It's a decent ultrawide on full frame, but is my least used lens.


James Harris Photography - Weddings Portraits Events (external link)
Canon 7D, 5D Mkii, 580EX II X2, 430EX, ST-E2
24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ii, 17-40mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MassiveSi
Member
109 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: London
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:03 |  #38

am really interested in this thread.

you'd turn IS off for landscapes anyway wouldn't you?


7d | 5Dm2 |17-40 L | 70-200 F/4 L IS | EFS 18-55 | Canon 28-135mm | Canon 85mm 1.8 | MP-E 65mm | Sigma 50-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eddie
xpfloyd lookalike
Avatar
14,595 posts
Gallery: 679 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 10481
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
     
Dec 15, 2011 14:56 |  #39

MassiveSi wrote in post #13549923 (external link)
am really interested in this thread.

you'd turn IS off for landscapes anyway wouldn't you?

Yes. I like the IS on my 24-105 but certainly dont miss it on the 17-40. Usually im tripod mounted and at a narrow aperture and long(ish) exposure so IS is irrelvent.

(To me anyway)


α7RV
16-35GM | 24GM | 35GM | 85GM | Tamron 35-150 | Sigma 105 Macro Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,406 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3420
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 15, 2011 17:39 |  #40

MassiveSi wrote in post #13549923 (external link)
am really interested in this thread.

you'd turn IS off for landscapes anyway wouldn't you?

only if you're on a tripod...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MOkoFOko
nut impotent and avoiding Geoff
Avatar
19,889 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Dec 15, 2011 17:42 |  #41

DreDaze wrote in post #13551108 (external link)
only if you're on a tripod...

This. On a nice bright day, you can easily stop down to f/9ish with low ISO and handhold without IS


My Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
big_g
Goldmember
1,064 posts
Gallery: 418 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2218
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Lincolnshire UK, Live in Scotland
     
Dec 15, 2011 17:51 as a reply to  @ MOkoFOko's post |  #42

I think that with a lens this wide and it being such a featherweight IS isn't really an issue anyway.

Some people have got a bit obsessed with IS. It is nice to have but on small or wide lenses it isn't such a big deal


Very lucky to have a lot of nice toys :)
Flickr Site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thedge
Senior Member
417 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 15, 2011 18:25 |  #43

Ive rented it and I really like it on my 7D. Not too heavy, very solid build, USM, weather sealed (a plus, I hike a lot). That said its short on the long end and the f4 can be limiting depending on what you want (not much light, hand holding, etc). I would buy it though.

On the flip side, im not a fan of the 17-55 2.8.


7D - 100-400 L, Sigma 28, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Max ­ Powers
Goldmember
1,114 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
     
Dec 19, 2011 05:26 |  #44

Tsmith wrote in post #13545702 (external link)
"Not so great on crop"

Why post such when that's totally false information?

It's not false information, like the other guy said, there are just better choices for a crop, IMO.

I'm sure it does totally fine on crop bodies, but I think the extra range and faster f2.8 of the tamron makes for a much better deal at half the price.

To reiterate, there is nothing wrong with the 17-40L on a crop. I apologize for the wording.


Nikon D600
-Samyang 14mm f2.8 -Nikon 50mm 1.8G -Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR
-Nikon 24-120 f3.5-5.6 D
flickr (external link)||500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,774 posts
Gallery: 246 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 844
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Dec 19, 2011 07:15 |  #45

Max Powers wrote in post #13567088 (external link)
It's not false information, like the other guy said, there are just better choices for a crop, IMO.

I'm sure it does totally fine on crop bodies, but I think the extra range and faster f2.8 of the tamron makes for a much better deal at half the price.

To reiterate, there is nothing wrong with the 17-40L on a crop. I apologize for the wording.

Some people value USM, FTM (I will not buy another lens without it), internal focusing, weather sealing, etc, etc, etc, so I guess that it's not such a clear-cut deal to others.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

8,230 views & 0 likes for this thread, 38 members have posted to it and it is followed by 3 members.
17-40L f/4 any drawbacks?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.55forum software
version 2.55 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is marthabrand134
458 guests, 154 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.