Sell 17-40L for 16-35 f4L IS?

Hey guys,

Recently I have been using my 50L almost exclusively for my shoots. I do use my wide angle when I need to either for interior shots or for the dramatic wide angle look. The 17-40L always left me a bit disappointed in terms of sharpness, wide angle distortion, and corners were always lacking.

The new 16-35L has come out and it has me very interested. The sharpness looks to be fantastic and distortion seems better also. How many have switched from old 17-40L to new 16-35L IS and have never looked back?

If you have the cash - go for it. It all depends on what you're shooting the most.

Well I don't think you are missing anything, in your post you say "never looked back", despite 5mm of focal length everything is an upgrade. It's just a matter of need and want really, if you think your pics are to distorted on the corners and not sharp enough in the middle go for it, if not then it may not be worth it. If IS at that focal length is important to you then thats another reason to upgrade, but I personally don't see the value, if I had other gaps to feel in my kit I would go there, or if my kit was complete and I needed to scratch that itch then I'd go for it.

I sold my 17-40 with the intention of picking up the new 16-35. I liked the 17-40, it was/is a fine lens. Corner sharpness never bothered me especially when the only (current canon production) alternative was the $1500 16-35/2.8II. I didn't feel I needed f/2.8 in a UWA, so I could never justify the cost difference between the two.

With the new 16-35 out, I really am intrigued. I like IS as I have vowed to either buy a) lenses with IS, or b) faster than f/2.8 that don't really need IS. The added sharpness in the corners is just bonus to me after that.

You can't go wrong with any of these fine choices though. For your budget of approx. $600, the 17-40 is a fine choice. If you need faster than f/4, the 3rd party offerings seem to offer a lot of bang for buck.

I actually just sold my 17-40 this morning and i ordered the new 16-35, should get here friday though. but i really enjoyed the 17-40. i thought the f4 wouldve bothered me, but i ended up using it quite often.
i disliked the corner sharpness though. and the 16-35 f4 seems to remedy that problem. and i like the updated design and smaller hood. seeing some handheld shots of a second or even slower, i thought that was awesome. although i will miss the lightweight of the 17-40

I have my 17-40 sold and I'm going to order the new 16-35 f4 IS

If you look through the sample photo thread for the 17-40 it ought to impress you that there's a lot of mileage in that lens. Every time I dip into there I feel ashamed that it's my least used lens.

The 16-35 looks like an amazing lens, and if cost is not a factor it's the clear choice, but the 17-40 produces excellent images. The soft corners are a problem only for people who need corner-to-corner sharpness in their images (professionals in certain fields). The vast majority of humanity doesn't care about corner sharpness.

Heya,

Do it! Drive those 17-40 prices down!

Very best,

I think it all comes down to how much you'll use the lens on whether to get the 16-35 or not. Considering the 16-35 isn't that expensive, I would personally go for that without a doubt even though I own the 17-40 and love it.

If you already have the 17-40 and don't use it that much, I personally think it's a waste of money to upgrade and you might as well keep the 17-40.

Dlee13 wrote in post #17032522
If you already have the 17-40 and don't use it that much, I personally think it's a waste of money to upgrade and you might as well keep the 17-40.

^^ That is me

Go for it though I say if you can afford it. It's certainly a better lens just depends if you can justify the cost to yourself. Or your other half obviously in some cases

I had the 17-40L on my 6D probably 75% of the time. Loved everything about it. I sold it for the 16-35 and was blown away. Its as sharp as my 70-200. Nails every shot at f4. Oof areas are rendered nicely and it creates that micro contrast look in some cases. Its well worth every dollar. I have yet to find a downside to the lens.

I will most likely sell my 16-35L 2.8ii for the 16-35 with IS so for me if i would have a 17-40 it would be a no brainer for me.

However, i dont lose money by doing it, if done eight i even win. The 17-40 is a bit less worth so you must decide if you want to pay more. Still it all comes down to personal preferences, and IMHO i would do it

LeeRatters wrote in post #17032752
^^ That is me

Go for it though I say if you can afford it. It's certainly a better lens just depends if you can justify the cost to yourself. Or your other half obviously in some cases

I have the old Sigma 50 which I rarely use since I got my 35 and I doubt I'll ever get the Art since it's pretty much the same situation as the 17-40 and 16-35.

Tony_Stark does some amazing shots and I think he does them professionally (correct me if I'm wrong Tony_Stark) so the upgrade would probably be worth it if it pays for itself.

Dlee13 wrote in post #17032788
I have the old Sigma 50 which I rarely use since I got my 35 and I doubt I'll ever get the Art since it's pretty much the same situation as the 17-40 and 16-35.

Tony_Stark does some amazing shots and I think he does them professionally (correct me if I'm wrong Tony_Stark) so the upgrade would probably be worth it if it pays for itself.

Yup I do my automotive work full time. I don't use the 17-40L as much as I used to (before I got the 50L I used it a lot) but I can partially put it down to the IQ quirks. I would love to get some hands on with the lens and see if its right for me to upgrade. I'm also looking to pick up the 135L soon so that's kind of the priority right now. I do enjoy doing landscapes as well, and would love to have the full frame sharp that the new 16-35 seems to have.

Well, I switched because I could "gift" my almost nine year old 17-40 to my stepson, otherwise I likely wouldn't have. Now that I have the new 16-35 I can say it is a significant improvement over the older 17-40. So, knowing what I know now, I'd switch in a heartbeat!