Looking for a Wide Angle

Hi all - I'm in the market for a new wide angle, and I've been honing in on the Canon 17-40 f/4. It seems like a great lens for the price, and I know I don't need anything faster as landscapes & nature shots will be my primary focus. I'm curious if anyone has any other suggestions in this general focal length that I should be considering?

Are the lenses in your signature the only ones you have? If it were me, I'd want something more general-purpose... my personal choice would be a 24-70 2.8, but if landscapes and nature are your focus, and you're happy with f/4, a 24-105 (canon or sigma) may be a better choice. 17-40 is a great lens, but that still leaves you with a gap from 40-135mm, which is pretty big. I think you'll find 24 is still wide angle, maybe not as ultra-wide as 16 or 17mm, but enough to do the trick for most landscape usage.

If you want an ultrawide the 17-40 is a good choice. It suffers from some of the same issues that many ultrawides do, a bit soft in the corners until you stop down a bit. But for value its hard to beat.

The 2nd version of the Sigma 12-24 seems to be quite good and is the widest FF format UWA zoom.

http://www.photozone.d​e …ff/676-sigma1224f4556iiff

If you don't use filters, take a serious look at the Tokina 16-28 f2.8. I bought one, and coupled with the 5D3, it's so amazingly sharp!! I chose this over the 16-35II b/c it was just as sharp, if not a little better (especially at the corners) and half the price.

http://vimeo.com/73690​941

A lot of people like and recommend the 17-40L. Considered a good value. Hard to go wrong if that is the focal length that suits you.

Scud, on FF the 17-40 is a fantastic lens. I used if on my T3i for quite awhile and loved it on that. But on FF is really is a showstopper.
I would say without hesitation to keep an eye on them in the Canon Refurb site. The regular price of $671 is good, but I happened to grab one when they had a sale of $100 off anything over $500. So I got mine including tax for just a tough over $600. I don't regret the refurb purchase at all.

I recently went through the same decision process. Do you really feel you need an ultrawide zoom? I was really unimpressed with Canon's ultrawide zoom offerings when I started comparing them to other lenses.

For landscapes and nature photography, there are some gorgeous, third party, manual focus primes available. On a smaller budget, the Samyang lenses are nice performers. If your pockets are deeper, Zeiss has some stellar lenses at 21mm, 18mm, and 15mm.

Samyang 14mm f/2.8

The 17-40L is fantastic. I really enjoy that lens on a 5D.

Great- thank you guys for all your personal observations, experiences, and recommendations. I probably won't make a buying decision for a few weeks or so, so I'll use this upcoming time to look at these great suggestions - thanks again to all!

Being that you have been around while, I probably don't have to tell you to check out the lens sample threads. That is how I get myself in trouble a lot around here. Once I have seen what some of the lenses can do in competent hands, I really get a bad case of GAS.
I have been looking at shots in the 150-600 Tamron thread and am feeling my pocket get lighter by the day. At least the good news with that lens it is generally on back order so I can't get one on an impulse buy which is usually what happens when I see one I have been eyeing on sale or for cheap at the stores.

bseitz234 wrote in post #16815786
Are the lenses in your signature the only ones you have? If it were me, I'd want something more general-purpose... my personal choice would be a 24-70 2.8, but if landscapes and nature are your focus, and you're happy with f/4, a 24-105 (canon or sigma) may be a better choice. 17-40 is a great lens, but that still leaves you with a gap from 40-135mm, which is pretty big. I think you'll find 24 is still wide angle, maybe not as ultra-wide as 16 or 17mm, but enough to do the trick for most landscape usage.

Yes, the ones I have in my sig line are what I have. I used to have the 24-105 and really loved it, but sold it to eventually purchase more of a dedicated wide angle. My main interest is hiking out west, and I know how valuable a wide angle is out there - plus, I only have so much room in that backpack, so I'm looking for practicality as well. I love shooting wide where I can have something of strong interest in the foreground to go along with something distinct out there in the background.

sirquack wrote in post #16816258
Being that you have been around while, I probably don't have to tell you to check out the lens sample threads. That is how I get myself in trouble a lot around here. Once I have seen what some of the lenses can do in competent hands, I really get a bad case of GAS.
I have been looking at shots in the 150-600 Tamron thread and am feeling my pocket get lighter by the day. At least the good news with that lens it is generally on back order so I can't get one on an impulse buy which is usually what happens when I see one I have been eyeing on sale or for cheap at the stores.

Ron - you bet - those lens sample threads have the effect of a moth to a flame on me

The 17-40 and Tokina's 16-28/2.8 are both worth considering. I started with a Samyang 14/2.8 and a 24-105, sold the Samyang for a 17-40, and then sold that for a 16-35/2.8 II. The Samyang is special-purpose and doesn't do well with subjects that move. The 17-40 was too slow for event shoots. Ergo, 16-35. The 16-28 is just as good optically and costs a lot less. You just get more flare, slower AF, and less range (things that don't tend to matter when you have to time to set the shot up).