Noticed there have been a ton for sale lately. What's going on?
J.Litton Goldmember 1,741 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jan 2010 Location: Florida's Treasure Coast More info | Apr 22, 2012 15:15 | #1 Noticed there have been a ton for sale lately. What's going on? 7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 22, 2012 15:33 | #2 Cause everybody is selling it to fund the 5D Mark III..
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JackLiu Senior Member 570 posts Joined Apr 2009 Location: Ventura County, Calif., USA More info | Apr 22, 2012 15:40 | #3 IMHO the 5DM3 is a little pricey vs 5D2 and D800. "Love life and life will love you back. Love people and they will love you back." Arthur Rubinstein.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
iLvision Cream of the Crop 5,766 posts Joined Oct 2011 Location: Western pot hole city, Massachusetts More info | Apr 22, 2012 15:43 | #4 |
J.Litton THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,741 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jan 2010 Location: Florida's Treasure Coast More info | Apr 22, 2012 15:56 | #5 I love my 17-40 as my wide angle landscape lens. 7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
One of the cheaper "L" lenses. Really I consider it an entry level "L" lens, therefore once a new guy gets the "I want better" it gets sold. A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
LOG IN TO REPLY |
nikesupremedunk Goldmember 1,131 posts Joined Feb 2011 Location: ny More info | Apr 22, 2012 16:00 | #7 probably people that are buying it on crop. i don't think i'll ever sell my 17-40 as long as i have my 5d2 because where else can you buy an UWA with L build quality and get ultra sharp pictures for 6-700$? if you need a UWA and don't necessarily need the 2.8, there's no better decision than this. but if you are buying it to replace a normal zoom on crop, look elsewhere. | 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 |
nikesupremedunk Goldmember 1,131 posts Joined Feb 2011 Location: ny More info | Apr 22, 2012 16:05 | #8 Talley wrote in post #14309404 One of the cheaper "L" lenses. Really I consider it an entry level "L" lens, therefore once a new guy gets the "I want better" it gets sold. "get it" haha i don't agree with it being an entry level L lens. it's built and performs as well as any other L lenses (even as good as the twice as expensive 16-35 II) and only at a fraction of the price most go for. | 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 |
Apr 22, 2012 16:22 | #9 nikesupremedunk wrote in post #14309428 i don't agree with it being an entry level L lens. it's built and performs as well as any other L lenses (even as good as the twice as expensive 16-35 II) and only at a fraction of the price most go for. ![]()
A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
LOG IN TO REPLY |
J.Litton THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,741 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jan 2010 Location: Florida's Treasure Coast More info | Apr 22, 2012 16:31 | #10 I use mine in the 7D and it's grewt 7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Preeb Goldmember More info | If I had a FF body, I'd still have my 17-40. As it is, I'm going to be a crop shooter, probably for life, so I sold it and got what I consider a better lens for a crop body, the 17-55 f2.8. Rick
LOG IN TO REPLY |
J.Litton THREAD STARTER Goldmember 1,741 posts Likes: 16 Joined Jan 2010 Location: Florida's Treasure Coast More info | Apr 22, 2012 17:05 | #12 Why do you think it's better? What do you use it for? 7D MK II.17-40L.100-400L.500L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Canon_Lover Goldmember 2,673 posts Likes: 101 Joined Jan 2011 Location: WA More info | I got rid of two of them.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Preeb Goldmember More info | Apr 22, 2012 17:27 | #14 J.Litton wrote in post #14309651 Why do you think it's better? What do you use it for? The 17-55 is sharper and faster than the 17-40. What else does it need to be? It's my primary lens, stays on my camera more than any other. Rick
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Andrew_WOT Goldmember 1,421 posts Joined Mar 2010 Location: CA More info | Apr 22, 2012 17:31 | #15 Canon_Lover wrote in post #14309652 I got rid of two of them. Good for the price, but my 16-35II just kills it in landscapes. ![]() Do you take them at F2.8?
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 zachary24 1552 guests, 130 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||