EF 17-40 L

Another couple of helpful (and good) shots there bluebomberx, thanks for that. I can see virtually no distortion at 19mm which is very good, and better since I like doing the vertical landscape shots.
Thanks again

Here is another example from the EF 17-40 f/4L. This one was shot with my Elan 7e on Fuji Reala 100 and I used a C-Pl. The standard filter vignettes at 17mm with the 17-40 f/4L. This was corrected in Photoshop for a tilted horizon and the corners were cut out slightly.

[I]17mm - exposure unrecorded

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Reading this forum is expensive! I just ordered my third L series lens. Cut it out!
I was losing sleep on the wide angle zoom debate (Canon v. Sigma v. ?). I figured by getting the 17-40L, I will at least sleep after the lens arrives and not always wonder if I made the right choice.

I did the same thing Chris. The lens was less than double the cost of the Sigma 15-30,. so the choice wasn't quite so hard. It is my only Canon "L".

At the long end the Canons can be more like three times the cost of the Sigma... thats a little harder to justify for an amatuer.

Camerahouses come and go but the lenses are an long time investment.

I totally agree that for an amature L can be hard to justify sometimes, but for people who earn money on their photography, its the only way

Sometimes, all that stands between success and failure is the lens. Therefore it is justified with L-lenses

Hi,

this might be another useful link with a great review ot he 17-40 and some test shots.


http://burren.cx …/ultrawide/1530​v1740.html

What will this lens cost.
With the L prefix I guess I will have to give away my house

$800.00/US