Is this a normal amount of distortion for the 17-40?

I've noticed lately that whenever I shoot this lens fully wide at 17 I get some distortion in the corners. This is even after I have ACR (cs6) apply it's lens correction profile which I think removes some of it.

Here's an example I shot last night

yea it distorts a lot at 17.

The "distortion" you see is mostly perspective distortion, caused by being so close to the fence and the angle between the camera and fence not being 90°. It really has nothing to do with the specific lens you used.

Please read our "sticky" (found in the General Photography Talk forum) tutorial titled Perspective Control in Images - Focal Length or Distance?.

Excellent, thanks!

I'll be sure to check that out.

I don't see any distortion in the posted image, but really with that subject I doubt we ever would.

When people discuss the distortion that is a function of the lens itself, they are talking about how the lens reders straight lines. Here is an example from a lens with notable barrel distortion (the EF 24-105L) at 24mm. I give you as shot and then corrected for illustration.

In Lightroom for example, such distortion is a one click repair. Most PP software has some means of correcting it.

JeffreyG wrote in post #15403190
I don't see any distortion in the posted image, but really with that subject I doubt we ever would.

When people discuss the distortion that is a function of the lens itself, they are talking about how the lens reders straight lines. Here is an example from a lens with notable barrel distortion (the EF 24-105L) at 24mm. I give you as shot and then corrected for illustration.

The OP's distortion was perspective distortion. Perhaps you didn't see it (it is HUGE) because you were looking for barrel distortion, like that in the shot you posted. They are two completely different animals.

TSchrief wrote in post #15403786
The OP's distortion was perspective distortion. Perhaps you didn't see it (it is HUGE) because you were looking for barrel distortion, like that in the shot you posted. They are two completely different animals.

Lenses do not have perspective distortion. They can only have barrel, pincushion and moustache.

I guess some people get surprised when they are really close to their subject and things look funny in the corner, but that is hardly a function of the lens.

JeffreyG wrote in post #15404512
Lenses do not have perspective distortion. They can only have barrel, pincushion and moustache.

I guess some people get surprised when they are really close to their subject and things look funny in the corner, but that is hardly a function of the lens.

I can't argue with that. The OP was asking about the lens' distortion. The example he posted actually displays perspective distortion which, I believe, is a function of the angle the film (sensor) plane vs. the object in question. His photo was an example of perspective distortion. Thanks for pointing out the difference.

The original image has larger diamonds on the top than bottom because of the way you angled the lens (your perspective). And yes the 17-40 has noticeable distortion at the wide end. Shoot a brick wall to see what I mean.