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 14 Aug 2011 (Sunday) 23:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 17-40 f/4 versus 17-35 f/2.8

 
Architective
Member
183 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2009
     
Aug 14, 2011 23:08 |  #1

I'm going to be in the market for a lens shortly, and am doing the research on them now. I am going to be doing Architectural Photography. I have a TS-E 24mm, also, and am shooting with a 50D, but will be going full frame within the year (5D mk2).

I've been set on the 17-40 if I couldn't get to the 16-35. But in my research, I found the 17-35 f/2.8, which can be had used for roughly the same range as the 17-40 is new. It doesn't seem to get mentioned much on this forum, so I wonder if anyone has experience with them.

Is it worth it to get the older 17-35(used) over the 17-40(new)?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gotaudi
Senior Member
720 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Southern California
     
Aug 15, 2011 01:42 |  #2

I would go with the 17-40mm only for the fact that Canon still services it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,499 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 15, 2011 06:27 |  #3

Would there even be an advantage having F/2.8 if doing architecture? In which case you'd be more concerned with distortion I'm guessing (sorry, no idea how they compare).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alquimista
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,998 posts
Gallery: 91 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 186
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Miami/Beijing
     
Aug 15, 2011 13:01 |  #4

The 17-40 on full frame is very wide, I think would be better for any type of scenic photography


la costura de Dios
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/andresmoline/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tomnomnom
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Home: Whitestone, NY. School: Bethlehem, PA
     
Aug 15, 2011 14:11 |  #5

I picked up a used 17-35 from my local camera store for a decent price. It's not incredibly sharp wide open but it gets the job done. Probably for arch, as phreeky said, 2.8 would never come into play. But, if you're on a budget, it's not a bad "advantage."


Tom Flores
1D Mark II|Canon 17-35mm 2.8L|Canon 50mm 1.4|Canon 135mm 2.0L|Tokina 10-17 3.5 Fisheye|380EX
FLUIDR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Aug 15, 2011 14:42 |  #6

I had one and it was a good lens.... A little chromatic abberation at times, especially wide open. But otherwise pretty good. I never shot much digital with it, maybe it's possible to correct the CA in post.

Today I'd probably go with the 17-40 instead, since it's still in production. But I don't know that Canon has stopped servicing the 17-35... If they have parts for it, they will probably service it if needed.

However, as said previously, IMO there's little need for f2.8 for architectural photography. Usually I'm stopping down for more DOF, not opening up to the max. Not to mention that the 5DII, when you get it, will be good for two or more stops lower light than you find acceptible with your 50D.

For architecture, I'd perfer the 17/4 TS-E... Of course it's a wee bit more expensive!

Another lens that might work out well is the Tokina 17/3.5. I haven't used it personally so can't attest to it's image quality. Tokina no longer makes it, but it shows up used occasionally.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Architective
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
183 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2009
     
Aug 15, 2011 22:50 as a reply to  @ amfoto1's post |  #7

You're right, the f/2.8 wouldn't be very useful for the type of composed, tripod shooting that I do. It could be nice for using it for other things (pics of the kids, etc), but eventually I'd like to get a 24-70L f/2.8 for that purpose.

I'm also leaning towards the 17-40L. I think it'll do all I need it to until I can upgrade to the 16-35. I think that it should be wide enough - right now with the 50D and 10-22 I can shoot most interiors. Will the 17 be wide enough for interiors, or will I need to go with a 14-15mm?

People mention the "date code" when buying these lenses - what is to look for?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmward
Cream of the Crop
9,081 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 1524
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Metro Chicago
     
Aug 15, 2011 23:43 |  #8

I have the 17-35 F2.8 and its a nice lens.
I had a 17-40 F4 and sold it because I fell into the 17-35 F2.8 its reasonably sharp wide open and works well for architecture.

I use it with my 5DIIs and recently acquired 7D.

Now I think I'm going to sell the 17-35 because I've found I want longer rather than shorter. :-)


David | Sharing my Insights, Knowledge & Experience (external link) | dmwfotos website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pingman
Senior Member
Avatar
417 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Apr 2011
Location: DFW Metro
     
Aug 16, 2011 00:22 |  #9

Architective wrote in post #12942656 (external link)
You're right, the f/2.8 wouldn't be very useful for the type of composed, tripod shooting that I do. It could be nice for using it for other things (pics of the kids, etc), but eventually I'd like to get a 24-70L f/2.8 for that purpose.

I'm also leaning towards the 17-40L. I think it'll do all I need it to until I can upgrade to the 16-35. I think that it should be wide enough - right now with the 50D and 10-22 I can shoot most interiors. Will the 17 be wide enough for interiors, or will I need to go with a 14-15mm?

People mention the "date code" when buying these lenses - what is to look for?

I would be careful about going wider than 16 or 17mm when you upgrade to a FF. You start getting quite a bit of distortion from that point on. That FF will really show it. I normally shoot interiors at 16mm F8 and you can get away with fixing it in PS with the lens profile. I will be moving to a TS-E 17 soon. Those are just too good for RE shots.


(Gear & Feedback)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pingman
Senior Member
Avatar
417 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Apr 2011
Location: DFW Metro
     
Aug 16, 2011 00:30 |  #10

Architective wrote in post #12942656 (external link)
You're right, the f/2.8 wouldn't be very useful for the type of composed, tripod shooting that I do. It could be nice for using it for other things (pics of the kids, etc), but eventually I'd like to get a 24-70L f/2.8 for that purpose.

I'm also leaning towards the 17-40L. I think it'll do all I need it to until I can upgrade to the 16-35. I think that it should be wide enough - right now with the 50D and 10-22 I can shoot most interiors. Will the 17 be wide enough for interiors, or will I need to go with a 14-15mm?

People mention the "date code" when buying these lenses - what is to look for?


Here is date code info if this is what you are asking for.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …ses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx (external link)


(Gear & Feedback)

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

6,563 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 17-40 f/4 versus 17-35 f/2.8
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 majorsite2
1007 guests, 236 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.