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 29 Aug 2007 (Wednesday) 13:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Would the EF 17-40 f/4L ....

 
canon_fire
Senior Member
Avatar
854 posts
Joined Dec 2006
     
Aug 29, 2007 13:08 |  #1

Be a decent replacement to my Siggy 17-70?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
franklinn
previously 'CorporationMe'
Avatar
1,424 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Aug 29, 2007 13:40 |  #2

I have read that some people on here have sold their 17-40L and replaced it with a Siggy 17-70, and have been even more so satisfied with the 17-70 than the 17-40L. Conversely, there are many people on here who own the 17-40L and would never in their wildest dreams replace it with the Sigma 17-70. I personally have only used the 17-40L myself, and it is an absolute pleasure to shoot with... the IQ, the colours, the sharpness... it's a fantastic lens.



Frank | 5D MK II
| 35 1.4L | Marketplace Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Adcuz
Senior Member
Avatar
507 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Hampshire, UK
     
Aug 29, 2007 13:40 |  #3

Yes. Very good.

I'd get a 10-22mm if I was you though :)


My Gear List | My Site (external link)| My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SilentBob
Member
Avatar
103 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
     
Aug 29, 2007 13:42 |  #4

I too enjoy my 17-40L.

Regards,


Canon 30D
Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Canon 85mm f/1.8
My Gallery (external link)


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
angryhampster
"Got a thick monopod?"
Avatar
3,860 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2006
Location: Iowa
     
Aug 29, 2007 13:46 |  #5

Why do you want it? The only thing you really gain is build quality. It won't focus as close and it's not as fast at the short end.


Steve Lexa
Iowa City Wedding Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Aug 29, 2007 15:09 |  #6

canon_fire wrote in post #3821144 (external link)
Be a decent replacement to my Siggy 17-70?

In a word - NO!

Owned both, sold both. Glad to get rid of the 17-40L (for my crop camera), but regret getting rid of the 17-70. The only advantages to the 17-40 are build-quality and saturation (easy fix in PP). If you plan to go to a FF camera soon, keep the 17-40; you'll need it as an ultrawide angle (its intended purpose).


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bacchanal
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,284 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
     
Aug 29, 2007 15:17 as a reply to  @ Tony-S's post |  #7

Mmmm....17-55IS...;)


Drew A. | gear | photosexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Steiglitz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,526 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Lake George, NY State, Supposed Arrogant, but Not really....
     
Aug 29, 2007 16:07 |  #8

angryhampster wrote in post #3821338 (external link)
Why do you want it? The only thing you really gain is build quality. It won't focus as close and it's not as fast at the short end.

Completely untrue!

With the 17-40L , you gain better color, better contrast, and razor sharp wide open at F4, faster and quieter focus, weather/dust sealed...the Siggy may provide F2.8 but it is too soft, so really the Siggy is also an F4 lens. Good luck finding a Sig that is sharp wide open....you better get a list of retailers and start very early in the day...


Gear is essential, but often has little to do with composition, pictures, and art...Alfred Steiglitz :lol:

Canon 5D, Canon 1D Mark II, All L primes from 14mm through 200mm. All L zooms from 16mm through 400mm. 2.0x TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MrChad
Goldmember
Avatar
2,815 posts
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Chicagoland
     
Aug 29, 2007 16:19 as a reply to  @ Steiglitz's post |  #9

I love my 17-40L but I wish it was a 17-70L instead. I doubt you will find a huge improvement on a crop body. I own a 17-40L because a can't use a 17-55 IS on my D30; also a hate the price vs. build of the EF-S lenses.

I own the one EF-S lens I do because Canon leaves me no choice.


I kaNt sPeL...
[Gear List]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Aug 29, 2007 16:54 |  #10

Steiglitz wrote in post #3822171 (external link)
Completely untrue!

With the 17-40L , you gain better color, better contrast, and razor sharp wide open at F4,

My 17-70 was sharper than my 17-40L at f/4. This was why I got rid of it. It wasn't until f/5.6 or 8 that it became sharp. Seems that the 17-40L has a big standard deviation when it comes to sharpness at f/4. Plus, the Sigma was much better at 41-70mm. :)


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Aug 29, 2007 16:59 |  #11

canon_fire wrote in post #3821144 (external link)
Be a decent replacement to my Siggy 17-70?

Yes, if you want L-build quality, weathersealing, ring USM with FTM, and FF compabitility.

Otherwise, no.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Isaac86hatch
Member
122 posts
Joined Apr 2007
     
Aug 29, 2007 17:16 |  #12

No, but the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 would be.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Aug 29, 2007 17:32 |  #13

I went through all of this. To me, 2.8 doesn't do me much good indoors.I Still find it too slow. I use a 50 1.8 as my indoor lens and the 17-40L as my landscape lens. I find the color and contrast on the L to be top notch. I never need to adjust these in PP. The sharpness is good IMHO and close to he 70-200L. The build quality is *outstanding*, the focus blazing fast, and it works on all Canon camera bodies. I also like the cooler color cast on the Canon lenses.

If I had only one complaint, I would like it to be a 50mm or 55. But it is really designed to be a SWA on a full frame, so there's no point in complaining. Exceptional landscape lens.The color and contrast really puts it ahead of other lenses for landscape use.


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
argyle
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,187 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Apr 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
     
Aug 30, 2007 06:55 |  #14

MrChad wrote in post #3822251 (external link)
...also a hate the price vs. build of the EF-S lenses.

I don't understand why people gripe about the "build quality" of the EFS10-22. The term has become a cliche, another overused "buzzword". There's nothing wrong with the construction of the 10-22...its an excellent lens that is built really well. We're taking photographs with it, not hammering nails. Mine is very solid, has USM, doesn't suffer from zoom creep (unlike my Tamron 28-75), and does its job just fine. It may not be weather-sealed, but I'm not shooting in downpours or hurricanes either.

OP: On a crop camera, to go 'wide' you really have to consider the 10-22 or a lens of similar range from Tamron or Sigma. The 17-xx on a crop just doesn't do it. I initially bought my 17-40 for use on my 30D. Once I got the 10-22, it opened up a whole new world. Now, the 17-40 is where it really belongs...on the 5D.


"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son". - Dean Wormer

GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
versedmb
Goldmember
4,448 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Apr 2006
     
Aug 30, 2007 10:05 |  #15

argyle wrote in post #3825828 (external link)
I don't understand why people gripe about the "build quality" of the EFS10-22. The term has become a cliche, another overused "buzzword". There's nothing wrong with the construction of the 10-22...its an excellent lens that is built really well. We're taking photographs with it, not hammering nails. Mine is very solid, has USM, doesn't suffer from zoom creep (unlike my Tamron 28-75), and does its job just fine. It may not be weather-sealed, but I'm not shooting in downpours or hurricanes either.

Couldn't agree more. 10-22 is well built, even if it is EF-S lens (God forbid!!).

Unless you planning on upgrading to FF soon I wouldn't trade my 17-70 for a 17-40; now the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, that's another story.

The only advatage to me of a 17-40 over the 17-70 would be USM. The 17-70 is well built and is a very versatile lens. I don't think it would be much of an "upgrade".


Gear List

Michael

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

1,756 views & 0 likes for this thread
Would the EF 17-40 f/4L ....
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 TarynRose
1159 guests, 300 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.