17-40L on a crop.

So i had mixed feelings about ordering my 17-40L. i read so many mixed reviews but I'm pretty happy on how it is performing. here are just a couple examples from the past few days. Im loving the focal range, not SUPER wide but just the right amount for me!

7D+17-40L

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​215333431/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​216415768/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​215332323/

Congratz as long as you are happy with it.....

Looks good.. but rather surprised you didn't go with a 17-5x (such as the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS), to match up with your 50-150. You would have had 17-150 covered, with 2.8 and OS.

Photos look quite good...Congrats on the new lens.

1Tanker wrote in post #15285608
Looks good.. but rather surprised you didn't go with a 17-5x (such as the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS), to match up with your 50-150. You would have had 17-150 covered, with 2.8 and OS.

i thought about it because the 2.8 and OS is very tempting but i got one hell of a deal on the 17-40L!

I'm sure you can make it work for you, but when I'm taking pictures of my kids I'm almost always needing more reach not less.

I remember when the 17-40 was thee walk around lens to own for a cropper .

Great pics! I love my 17-40, both on my FF and my cropper.

ed rader wrote in post #15285732
I remember when the 17-40 was thee walk around lens to own for a cropper .

Yeah, I don't know exactly when this lens fell out of favor. This was the lens I bought when I purchased my first digital body (10D), and it still resides in my bag today. It's maybe not a "wow" lens, but it's certainly pro quality, and a solid performer.

casaaviocar wrote in post #15286355
Yeah, I don't know exactly when this lens fell out of favor...

I think it was just when the 17-55/2.8 came out, beating it on a crop camera in just about every way. I started with a 30D and 17-40L and was very happy. Even now I'll use it on my 7D as a standard zoom.

casaaviocar wrote in post #15286355
Yeah, I don't know exactly when this lens fell out of favor. This was the lens I bought when I purchased my first digital body (10D), and it still resides in my bag today. It's maybe not a "wow" lens, but it's certainly pro quality, and a solid performer.

There is nothing wrong with a 17-40L on a crop body. It's just that there are better options available now -- EFS 17-55 f/2.8 IS, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, EFS 15-85 IS, etc. All these have a larger focal range, image stabilization and in some cases faster aperture.

I agree, it is not that there is anything wrong with it on a crop camera (though I'm sure there are some FF users that will disagree with that statement), it is just that now there are now better options for crop cameras. These options include F/2.8, IS, and longer focal range.

The constant f/2.8 are better in aperture, range, and IQ plus most have IS.

Except for the constant f/2.8 versions all IS with better range lenses are variable aperture with all the high ends being f.5.6 (most low end f/3.5) with many(most?) users ranking them below the L in IQ and build (the Canon 15-85 and Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 being an exceptions for IQ). And all are arguably poorer in aperture. So IMO the only benefit of these over the 17-40 are possibly price, IS, and range.

So unless you also need the lens for a FF and or a film camera the constant f/2.8s are typically considered a better lens on a crop cameras.

Nice pics by the way!

Now the OP says she (assumption photographer is a woman since a guy is in the photo with the baby) got a heck of a deal, then maybe the decision was made because of the price on a (IMO) excellent lens.

I too picked up my 17-40L because of a fantastic price. I will pick up a FF (beyond my film cameras) at some point and that was the first lens on buy/get list when that happened. A used one for an excellent price came up, and I could not pass up the deal. It is excellent on my crop camera.

I guess it was my only options for the 10D were the 17-40 or 17-35. The 17-40 was a nice combination of price and performance. I've never considered any EF-s lenses, they came out after the 10D, the 10D couldn't use them, and a 5D was the body I went to after my 10D. I like the idea of being able to use all of my lenses on all of my bodies, EF-s never even enters my mind.