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
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Dec 2011 (Thursday) 16:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

17-40 IQ question

 
goatydude
Senior Member
528 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Sale, Vic, Australia
     
Dec 22, 2011 20:53 |  #16

Maybe where you would notice the sharpness difference most would be on a a full frame or 1d where you use a larger portion of the glass for the image.


www.gippslandimages.co​m.au (external link)

1dmk4 1dmk2 50d 70-200 2.8L 17-40 f4L 50 2.5 100 2.8 macro, 28 1.8 and the rest.....

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 22, 2011 21:10 |  #17

goatydude wrote in post #13587636 (external link)
Testament to just how tough canon pro gear is really. If the lens did not have the scratch on it, it would have been fully usable, just wouldnt have been able to use a filter or hood. Like to see a 18-55 cop this type of abuse :-)

Glad to hear you weren't attached to it when it happened. If there is one advantage the 18-55 has here, on the used market, you could run over 6 of them and be out less than one 17-40. In fact if there is one lens I own that I would put into harms way at a rally race, it would be my 18-55.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goatydude
Senior Member
528 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Sale, Vic, Australia
     
Dec 22, 2011 23:49 as a reply to  @ FEChariot's post |  #18

Generally only put my go pro in harms way now, and it has no probs with abuse, had it ran over at least 5 times at the last event, heres a couple of shots would love the new one.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i268.photobucke​t.com …anno1_2008/webs​sat1-7.jpg (external link)


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i268.photobucke​t.com …8/canno1_2008/g​opro-2.jpg (external link)


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i268.photobucke​t.com …8/canno1_2008/g​opro-1.jpg (external link)

www.gippslandimages.co​m.au (external link)

1dmk4 1dmk2 50d 70-200 2.8L 17-40 f4L 50 2.5 100 2.8 macro, 28 1.8 and the rest.....

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Winwin
Senior Member
702 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
     
Dec 23, 2011 00:19 |  #19

I have a 17-40L. It's alright on my XSI, a bit better... but I wouldn't say it's amazing compared to the kit lens. That is, it doesn't blow me away.
If you're on a crop body, Ide have bought a Canon 17-55 IS instead 0_0. Sharp, versatile lens with IS!

But then, I LOVE 17-40L on my FF camera.


Win.
Canon 5D Mark III, 100 f/2.8L Macro, 50 f/1.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frugal
Senior Member
Avatar
784 posts
Joined May 2009
Location: Northern CA
     
Dec 23, 2011 00:43 as a reply to  @ Winwin's post |  #20

I've owned both. The difference in overall clarity and color rendition is night and day. My 17-40 is noticeably sharper, and has much better clarity, colors and contrast on my 50D. It's a fine lens on a crop at the price I paid though you'll find plenty of nasayers here.


Richard
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 23, 2011 01:14 |  #21

goatydude wrote in post #13588389 (external link)
heres a couple of shots would love the new one.

Those are sweet.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheBurningCrown
Goldmember
Avatar
4,882 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2008
     
Dec 23, 2011 01:24 |  #22

Frugal wrote in post #13588571 (external link)
I've owned both. The difference in overall clarity and color rendition is night and day.

I'd agree with this.

But as much as I defend the 17-40, I wouldn't say that it's sharper than the 18-55 IS. Then again - if you bought a lens just to be sharper than the 18-55 IS, I'm not sure what you were expecting...


-Dave
Gear List & Feedback
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,253 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Dec 23, 2011 01:31 |  #23

goatydude wrote in post #13586972 (external link)
Ive owned both and two copies of the 17-40 (one died when hit by a rally car)...

FEChariot wrote in post #13587185 (external link)
Snip. Say what? Holy crap, I need to hear more.

You've kept that quiet Dan...


Regards, Phil
2019 South Australian Country Press Assoc Sports Photo of the Year - Runner Up
2018 South Australian Country Press Assoc Sports Photo of the Year
2018 CAMS (now Motorsport Australia) Gold Accredited Photographer
Finallist - 2014 NT Media Awards
"A bad day at the race track is better than a good day in the office"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rusty.jg
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Cornwall, UK
     
Dec 23, 2011 06:26 as a reply to  @ philwillmedia's post |  #24

Personally (and I almost dont dare say it :D) but the 18-55 kit lens is actually quite a good performer in my eyes. Stop it down a bit and its plenty sharp with no obvious glaring issues.
Obviously there will be some CA and dark/light transitions are sometimes a little screwy (as mentioned above).

So comparing a 17-40 to the kit lens - you arent really going to see much difference in a big, obvious way.
Where the 17-40 comes into its own is the build, partial weather sealing, flare-resistance, CA control and of course it also works on FF. Not to mention you get to go to 17 (spinal tap goes to 11 anyone?).

I dont think there's another, better price-point/build/performanc​e WA lens available for Canon tbh.

On a t2i, it will of course provide great pictures but not night and day difference to your kit lens (which is possibly what one would expect given the price difference - but that price difference goes into other things rather than just image quality).

When I first had my 17-40 (on 5D), I was happy with it but not wowed and I wondered if it would stay. However its turned out to be my longest lasting lens as it's a reliable workhorse that delivers. There is one further advantage that is quite specific and that is it's an awesome Infrared WA lens so I probably wont ever get rid of it for that reason - even if I purchase a Nikon 14-24 for my 5D.....


to be OR NOT to be = 1 (which is "to be" so that one's cleared up at last ;-)a)
www.VividCornwall.co.u​k (external link) (external link)
Sony Nex-5n (x2) / Metabones EF-NEX Smart Adapter / Canon 10-22mm / Canon 100mm Macro / Sigma 18-50mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aCompanionCube
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Dec 23, 2011 09:19 |  #25

rusty.jg wrote in post #13589185 (external link)
On a t2i, it will of course provide great pictures but not night and day difference to your kit lens (which is possibly what one would expect given the price difference - but that price difference goes into other things rather than just image quality).

That's exactly the sort of answer I was looking for, as I know I am getting a lot of good features for the price, I just wasn't sure sharpness was a factor also. But the concensus seems that it's within normal limits, just not one of the few copies with exceptional sharpness.

I chose the 17-40 because I live on the coast so weather sealing is a big deal for longevity. Also I know I'll get a FF camera within another year and rebuying glass is a shortsighted issue.

Thank you all for the input so far, I'm still open to comments though.

Dan, those shots are incredible, thanks for sharing.


The Basics: Rebel t2i, 18-55mm kit lens, 55-250mm IS, 50mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rusty.jg
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Cornwall, UK
     
Dec 23, 2011 09:27 |  #26

aCompanionCube wrote in post #13589696 (external link)
....Also I know I'll get a FF camera within another year and rebuying glass is a shortsighted issue....


When you go FF - using your 17-40 will be like getting a different lens. Good choice.
I'm on the coast as well and I feel much happier knowing the lens has some protection against that dreadful spray/mist.


to be OR NOT to be = 1 (which is "to be" so that one's cleared up at last ;-)a)
www.VividCornwall.co.u​k (external link) (external link)
Sony Nex-5n (x2) / Metabones EF-NEX Smart Adapter / Canon 10-22mm / Canon 100mm Macro / Sigma 18-50mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goatydude
Senior Member
528 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Sale, Vic, Australia
     
Dec 23, 2011 17:50 |  #27

philwillmedia wrote in post #13588737 (external link)
You've kept that quiet Dan...

Happened at Bega this year, pretty funny really, Ive got a pic of it somewhere.
The only thing I was pissed at was that I didnt get a good shot out of the effort.


www.gippslandimages.co​m.au (external link)

1dmk4 1dmk2 50d 70-200 2.8L 17-40 f4L 50 2.5 100 2.8 macro, 28 1.8 and the rest.....

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,145 views & 0 likes for this thread
17-40 IQ question
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ArcticRose
724 guests, 291 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, 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.