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 23 Mar 2013 (Saturday) 13:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Going from 10-22mm to 17-40mm = :(

 
RobDickinson
Goldmember
4,003 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 1035
Joined Apr 2010
Location: New Zealand
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:38 |  #16

I'm more than happy with my 17-40L? Seems to deliver , its not perfect but then thats why I have the 24tse..:D

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8378/8584109608_d1c11d5e22_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/zarphag/8584109​608/  (external link)
Taylors Mistake 4 (external link) by robjdickinson (external link), on Flickr

www.HeroWorkshops.com (external link) - www.rjd.co.nz (external link) - www.zarphag.com (external link)
Gear: A7r, 6D, Irix 15mmf2.4 , canon 16-35f4L, Canon 24mm TS-E f3.5 mk2, Sigma 50mm art, 70-200f2.8L, 400L. Lee filters, iOptron IPano, Emotimo TB3, Markins, Feisol, Novoflex, Sirui. etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:44 |  #17

s2kdriver80 wrote in post #15747706 (external link)
Had crops with the 10-22mm, now have the 5D3s with the 16-35mm II. Great lens, sharp enough for me. Can easily fit CP/ND filters. Same equivalent focal range as the 10-22mm on crop but faster (good for astrophotography, better at stopping motion on top of the better FF high ISO, shallower dof). A bit more distortion but can be corrected in LR4.

This is what I hope my experience would be if I get the 16-35mm. Have you ever shot with the 17-40?


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nikesupremedunk
Goldmember
Avatar
1,131 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: ny
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:45 |  #18

That is a beautiful shot! I also had the tokina 11-16 on my t2i and also felt like OP with my current combo. I think it may just be a mental thing though..or it takes more skill and understanding to use uwa on ff. I won't blame my gear yet..


| Andrew | 5D Mark II | EOS-M | Canon 17-40mm f 4 L | Canon 35mm f 1.4 L | Canon 100mm f 2.8 L Macro | Canon 70-200mm f 4 L IS | Canon EF-M 22mm f 2.0 | Speedlite 430EX II|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:47 |  #19

RobDickinson wrote in post #15747716 (external link)
I'm more than happy with my 17-40L? Seems to deliver , its not perfect but then thats why I have the 24tse..:D

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/zarphag/8584109​608/  (external link)
Taylors Mistake 4 (external link) by robjdickinson (external link), on Flickr

Nice photo! No doubt that many love their 17-40, I just wish I was one of them...

I'm not happy with the lens even though it's not terrible, just not that great. My gut says get the 16-35, but my experimenter side says get the Sigma 12-24!


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:48 |  #20

nikesupremedunk wrote in post #15747727 (external link)
That is a beautiful shot! I also had the tokina 11-16 on my t2i and also felt like OP with my current combo. I think it may just be a mental thing though..or it takes more skill and understanding to use uwa on ff. I won't blame my gear yet..

I've been telling myself this same thing for the last year! After all the my outings with the 17-40, it's time for me to try something different.


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RobDickinson
Goldmember
4,003 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 1035
Joined Apr 2010
Location: New Zealand
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:53 |  #21

12-24 has filter issues though.

16-35 is good but really only worth it if you need the f2.8 (which I would like!)


www.HeroWorkshops.com (external link) - www.rjd.co.nz (external link) - www.zarphag.com (external link)
Gear: A7r, 6D, Irix 15mmf2.4 , canon 16-35f4L, Canon 24mm TS-E f3.5 mk2, Sigma 50mm art, 70-200f2.8L, 400L. Lee filters, iOptron IPano, Emotimo TB3, Markins, Feisol, Novoflex, Sirui. etc.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 17:58 |  #22

RobDickinson wrote in post #15747750 (external link)
12-24 has filter issues though.

16-35 is good but really only worth it if you need the f2.8 (which I would like!)

Filter issues make it a downer for me. And I don't really need the f2.8 of the 16-35, but what do to if the 17-40 isn't doing it??


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s2kdriver80
Senior Member
420 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Long Island, New York, United States
     
Mar 23, 2013 18:41 |  #23

bzollinger wrote in post #15747725 (external link)
This is what I hope my experience would be if I get the 16-35mm. Have you ever shot with the 17-40?

No sorry, have not. I didn't want to give up any on the wide end and speed never hurts.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)


-Paul
Canon EOS 5D Mark III x2 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM | Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS II USM | Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM | Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM | Canon Speedlite 430EX II x2 | Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bennis
Senior Member
368 posts
Joined Feb 2011
     
Mar 23, 2013 19:08 |  #24

Post some photos up with the FF 17mm setup vs your old 7D 10mm?

I use a simple 5Dclassic with a Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4. Has plenty of pop and is plenty sharp in my opinion. Then again, Its the only UWA combo I've ever had..


Fujifilm X-Pro1 ~ Fujinon XF 14mm f/2.8
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 19:31 |  #25

s2kdriver80 wrote in post #15747889 (external link)
No sorry, have not. I didn't want to give up any on the wide end and speed never hurts.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx (external link)

Yep I've read this review a couple of times now.


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Mar 23, 2013 20:42 |  #26

Have had both. Then sold them to get my current lenses. Now have some $ and have a 16-35 and Tiffen Variable ND filter in my Adorama cart. Gonna pull the trigger this week unless something better (or more intriguing comes along. :) Others may not agree but, the 16-35 just "feels" right when I look at the photos. This was shot with the 16-35:

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

AN4W7140.jpg (external link) by North Artworks (external link), on Flickr

My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 21:09 |  #27

alann wrote in post #15748189 (external link)
Have had both. Then sold them to get my current lenses. Now have some $ and have a 16-35 and Tiffen Variable ND filter in my Adorama cart. Gonna pull the trigger this week unless something better (or more intriguing comes along. :) Others may not agree but, the 16-35 just "feels" right when I look at the photos. This was shot with the 16-35:

The "just feels right" is what the problem is with the 17-40mm for me. So far out of the people that have posted there's one person that's really happy with their 17-40mm, two people saying they love their 16-35mm, and two people that have had the same experience moving from the 10-22mm to a FF UWA.

Maybe I should read a few of the "bought a 16-35mm after owning the 17-40" threads...


5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Mar 23, 2013 21:35 |  #28
bannedPermanent ban

Care to post an example that you aren't happy with?

Forget the 16-35II, it's actually slightly softer than 17-40 when stopped down for landscape.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robonrome
Goldmember
Avatar
2,746 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2008
Location: Australia
     
Mar 23, 2013 22:08 |  #29

bzollinger wrote in post #15748235 (external link)
The "just feels right" is what the problem is with the 17-40mm for me. So far out of the people that have posted there's one person that's really happy with their 17-40mm, two people saying they love their 16-35mm, and two people that have had the same experience moving from the 10-22mm to a FF UWA.

Maybe I should read a few of the "bought a 16-35mm after owning the 17-40" threads...

I've had them all. Unfortunately none of the full frame options really match my earlier experience using the 10-22 or indeed the to 11-16 on crop. I recently sold the16-35 mk 2 and am on my third copy of the 17-40. This one is the best of the three... a lot of copy variation out there. Last one I had was soft on the left side.


rob - check my galleries at http://hardlightimages​.zenfolio.com/ (external link)
Zenfolio coupon discount when signing up - 93R-NCK-DUT
_______________
Canon 5D Mkiii; Sony RX100; Lumix G5; 17-40L; 24L TS-E F3.5 Mk2; 24-105L IS; 40 F2.8; 135L; 70-200L F2.8 IS MkII; Ext II 1.4x; 580 exII; 270 ex... other filtery stuff:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bzollinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2009
Location: The Great White North!
     
Mar 23, 2013 22:20 |  #30

kin2son wrote in post #15748295 (external link)
Care to post an example that you aren't happy with?

Forget the 16-35II, it's actually slightly softer than 17-40 when stopped down for landscape.

This is a valid request and the second one at that. It's sounds stupid but it's really more of the way it feels to use, and maybe it's that 1mm of extra width? I have got sharp images from this lens:

IMAGE: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/16139001/lanscape/20130104-_O1C7852-Edit.jpg

5DMKIII | EOS M | 14mm f/2.8 Rokinon | 15mm f/2.8 fisheye | 16-35mm f/4 L | 24-105mm L | 50mm f/1.4 USM | 100mm Macro f/2.8 L IS | 580ex II | Benro C2980F Veratile legs w/ Manfrotto 468MGRC2 Head | www.alaskanphotographs​.com (external link)

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

7,331 views & 0 likes for this thread
Going from 10-22mm to 17-40mm = :(
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 sandertristan
803 guests, 379 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.