Recommend a UWA lens for 5D MKII

Ive been cruisin through the "sample" thread and looking both at the 17-40 and the 16-35,, I'm pretty impressed with both of these lens' actually,, one thing I was concerned about was the focal range on the 17-40,, I had a Sigma 17-70 for my 40D and it wasnt nearly as wide as the 10-22, after looking at the 17-40 on a FF sensor though, the range seems pretty impressive,, I'm gonna have to look for prices on both of these lens' and see what I can swing,, thanks again for everyone's input here,, having that sample gallery is a pretty impressive resource !!!

The 17-50mm on a crop perspective is FF perspective equivalent to 27-80 - no that is not wide.

Do the same a 10-22 is equivalent to 16-35 -that is wide. So is 17-40!

Just got the 17-40 from B&H yesterday, sales good till Feburary 2.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …_EF_17_40mm_f_4​L_USM.html

good decision, it's more worth the money than 16-35's, I tested them all and ended up with the Tokina 16-28 2.8. You see I have almost all Canon & L lenses, but don't stare blind on this, this Tokina is on par with the Nikon 14-14 IQ wise, very sharp and f2.8. If you do a correction of the lens profile in Lightroom, image changes about 1mm, almost no correction. This means the distortion is almost nihil! A nice tip for who doesn't know this lens, I discovered it myself also not so long ago, price second hand is extremely cheap seen the IQ : €580 in comparison with Canon.

CanonYouCan wrote in post #15447414
good decision, it's more worth the money than 16-35's, I tested them all and ended up with the Tokina 16-28 2.8. You see I have almost all Canon & L lenses, but don't stare blind on this, this Tokina is on par with the Nikon 14-14 IQ wise, very sharp and f2.8. If you do a correction of the lens profile in Lightroom, image changes about 1mm, almost no correction. This means the distortion is almost nihil! A nice tip for who doesn't know this lens, I discovered it myself also not so long ago, price second hand is extremely cheap seen the IQ : €580 in comparison with Canon.

The Tokina was on the top of my list for a landscape lens for my new 5D MKII, but the expense of filtering it pushed me to the 17-40.

maybe I'm dating myself, but I was always under the impression, from WAY back in my film days, that companies such as Tokina and Tamron were considered sub par,, I guess these companies have come a LONG way,, it wasnt just 5 years ago that I gave Sigma a chance,, now I own 2 but will be selling 1 the Tokina appeals to me but the bulbous front end of that lens bothers me somewhat, mainly for filtering reasons

What about an even cheaper option that should be almost as good as (if not as good as) the 17-40? Canon does have the EF 20/f2.8

Lenstip review of the EF 20 f/2.8 and the 17-40 f/4.0.

http://www.lenstip.com …mm_f_2.8_USM_Su​mmary.html

http://www.lenstip.com …m_f_4.0L_USM_Su​mmary.html

Osiriz wrote in post #15443434
It's no secret that these two lenses are lacking the critical sharpness that is needed for serious (pixel peeping) landscape photographers

Might not be good for pixel peepers, but they are just fine for working professionals and paying customers.