I'm impressed with both the 17-40 L and 24-105 L.
Wondering how these two lenses compare ? What are the pros and cons of each lens, when used on the 5D Mk. 11 ?
Thanks for any input.
Lesmore Senior Member 874 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jan 2011 More info | Jul 03, 2011 11:10 | #1 I'm impressed with both the 17-40 L and 24-105 L.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
paulkaye Senior Member  559 posts Likes: 3 Joined Nov 2010 Location: Leamington, UK More info | Jul 03, 2011 16:20 | #2 Well, one's a UWA zoom and the other's a wide to medium telephoto zoom. Neither costs a fortune, both give good image quality and both are limited to f4. What other comparisons can we make? Paul
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 04, 2011 15:53 | #3 paulkaye wrote in post #12698815  Well, one's a UWA zoom and the other's a wide to medium telephoto zoom. Neither costs a fortune, both give good image quality and both are limited to f4. What other comparisons can we make? 
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Jul 04, 2011 15:56 | #4 Rather than comparing them, consider them complementary. Both are F4 and there is a bit of overlap but get the one that covers the range you need more.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is semonsters 922 guests, 118 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
