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 25 Apr 2009 (Saturday) 15:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How much wider is 17mm over 24mm?

 
yogibear
Member
36 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:05 |  #1

I currently have the 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 IS lens. I'm thinking about adding a 17-40 but don't know if it's worth it because I'll only be gaining an additional 7mm. Will the additional 7mm in width make a significant difference? I own both a 5d II and a 40D. If the difference is not that much then I'll probably go in a different direction and get the Sigma 50 1.4 for its low light and bokeh advantage. Unfortunately, I only have funds for just one more lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
agc1019
Member
184 posts
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Boston, MA
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:13 |  #2

The difference between 24 and 17 is quite significant. It's not "just 7 mm", because 17mm is 30% shorter than 24mm. The math doesn't exactly work out this way, but it's similar to the difference between 100mm and 70mm.

If you find yourself stuck at 24mm a lot and wish you could go wider, then the 17-40 or other wideangle might be worth it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jacobsen1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Mt View, RI
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:23 as a reply to  @ agc1019's post |  #3

yeah, 17mm is a L O T W I D E R than 24mm. Hell, 20mm is even a lot wider. If you don't think it's enough range though, consider the sigma 12-24mm. 12mm on FF is O H M Y G O D W I D E ! ! !


My Gear List

my sites:
benjacobsenphoto.com (external link) | newschoolofphotography​.com (external link)
GND buyers FAQ

FOR SALE: 5Dii RRS L-bracket, 430II, 12mm macro tube PM ME!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
4rgentum
Member
Avatar
67 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: LA/Orange County
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:28 |  #4

go to a camera shop and try it out on your camera body to see what it looks like.


5DII //30D
canon 15mm Fisheye //16-35L //50 1.4 //85 1.8 //200 2.8L
3 EF-500 DG Supers //2 AB800s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:29 |  #5

See:
http://www.tamron.com …cal-length-comparison.php (external link)


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wimg
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,704 posts
Likes: 41
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Netherlands, EU
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:32 |  #6

The linear magnification factor going from 17 to 24 is 1.4X. This means that the area of view is 1.4 X 1.4 = 2X as large. IOW, the FoV of a 17 mm covers twice as much as a 24 mm.

That is a very significant difference, and is why I will hold on to a lens that will do 17 mm, besides a 24.

Kind regards, Wim


EOS R & EOS 5 (analog) with a gaggle of primes & 2 zooms, OM-D E-M1 Mk II & Pen-F with 10 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones adapters/speedboosters​, and an accessory plague

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Quad
Goldmember
Avatar
1,872 posts
Joined Nov 2005
     
Apr 25, 2009 15:35 |  #7

A 35 has a horizontal angle of view of 54 vertical of 38
A 24 has a horizontal angle of view of 74 vertical of 53
A 16 has a horizontal angle of view of 98 vertical of 74

So there is a progression of horizontal and vertical changing places.

A 17 is horizontal 93 vertical 70.5.

So it is almost the same difference from 35 to 24 to go to 17 (16 would match up perfectly). Does 24 seem significantly wider than 35 to you?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogibear
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
36 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Apr 25, 2009 16:03 |  #8

Thanks for all your comments. Gives me a lot to think about.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,090 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Dec 2005
     
Apr 25, 2009 16:10 |  #9

jacobsen1 wrote in post #7802381 (external link)
12mm on FF is O H M Y G O D W I D E ! ! !

Yeah it's nuts. :lol:


Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Roberts
revolting peasant
Avatar
3,079 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Location: UK
     
Apr 25, 2009 16:15 |  #10

At the wide end a few mm makes a HUGE difference!


BiLL

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daniel ­ Browning
Goldmember
1,199 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, WA
     
Apr 25, 2009 16:21 |  #11

yogibear wrote in post #7802326 (external link)
How much wider is 17mm over 24mm?

Remember all those fishing stories about the one that got away? How it's *this* big (gesturing with arms). That's 17mm.


Daniel

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Apr 25, 2009 18:06 |  #12

yogibear wrote in post #7802326 (external link)
I currently have the 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 IS lens. I'm thinking about adding a 17-40 but don't know if it's worth it because I'll only be gaining an additional 7mm. Will the additional 7mm in width make a significant difference? I own both a 5d II and a 40D.

Does it need to work with both bodies? Because the Canon 10-22 on the 40D is a great WA lens.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Karl ­ Johnston
Cream of the Crop
9,334 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jul 2008
     
Apr 25, 2009 18:16 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

If you think about the difference between 17 and 24 mm being 7 mms..imagine the difference between a 17-40 and a 14 2.8L

14 2.8L on full frame made me go O H M Y G O D THIS IS WIDE!


Adventurous Photographer, Writer (external link) & Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogibear
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
36 posts
Joined Jan 2009
     
Apr 25, 2009 18:23 |  #14

hollis_f wrote in post #7803101 (external link)
Does it need to work with both bodies? Because the Canon 10-22 on the 40D is a great WA lens.

I primarily use the 5d ii these days so I would need a full frame lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Apr 25, 2009 18:25 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

Here ya go:

http://forums.dpreview​.com …rum=1029&messag​e=24020518 (external link)


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

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

4,415 views & 0 likes for this thread
How much wider is 17mm over 24mm?
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 sfchen
986 guests, 333 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.