17-40 for daily use?

I currently have a 6dmk2 and would like to use it as my daily/do everything/go anywhere camera.

I have a 16-35mm f4L plus a few primes (28mm f1.8 USM, 50mm f1.8 STM, 85mm f1.8 USM) and a 70-200mm f2.8L.

I find that the 6dmk2 with my 16-35mm f4.0L is heavy; also bulky (the lens is physically longer than what I would like for a daily use lens). No complaints about the images I get from it, only that it is rather large and feels somewhat fragile being made mostly out of plastic. Doesn't feel like a typical, solid L.

So, I have been toying with the idea of getting a 17-40mm f4.0 L for daily use. I shoot mostly within the range of wide to moderately wide, so it would not be an issue for me.

I have read several reviews about it, and there seem to be mixed opinions regarding sharpness and vignetting issues. Anyone here used both the 17-40 and the 16-35mm f4.0L? If so, is the 17-40 truly that much noticeably worse than my 16-35mm f4.0L?

Again, I will be using it for non paid work, mostly for travel, weekend day trips to theme parks, grab and go daily shooter.

snegron wrote in post #19023096
I currently have a 6dmk2 and would like to use it as my daily/do everything/go anywhere camera.

I have a 16-35mm f4L plus a few primes (28mm f1.8 USM, 50mm f1.8 STM, 85mm f1.8 USM) and a 70-200mm f2.8L.

I find that the 6dmk2 with my 16-35mm f4.0L is heavy; also bulky (the lens is physically longer than what I would like for a daily use lens). No complaints about the images I get from it, only that it is rather large and feels somewhat fragile being made mostly out of plastic. Doesn't feel like a typical, solid L.

So, I have been toying with the idea of getting a 17-40mm f4.0 L for daily use. I shoot mostly within the range of wide to moderately wide, so it would not be an issue for me.

I have read several reviews about it, and there seem to be mixed opinions regarding sharpness and vignetting issues. Anyone here used both the 17-40 and the 16-35mm f4.0L? If so, is the 17-40 truly that much noticeably worse than my 16-35mm f4.0L?

Again, I will be using it for non paid work, mostly for travel, weekend day trips to theme parks, grab and go daily shooter.

the 16-35L f4 IS is probably the best all-around UW zoom made by anyone. the 17-40L was one of the best maybe 10 years ago, and easily canon's worst right now. having owned and used both extensively it astounds me you would consider the 17-40L, especially for the reasons you give.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com …mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

Compared to the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Lens

The 17-40 L's biggest advantage over the 16-35 L IS is price. It is also, as illustrated above, smaller and lighter, but these differences are not big. The 16-35 L IS delivers better image quality including notably sharper corners and less vignetting at wider apertures. The 16-35 L IS' image stabilization feature alone is worth more than the price differential to me. These focal length ranges are similar, but not identical. Both have an advantage, but I expect more to prefer the 16-35's extra 1mm on the wide end than the 17-40's extra 5mm on the long end.

Weight, size, portability. Also, walking through crowded theme parks is rough on gear especially when bumping into walls while trying to dodge crowds. I need a "beater" lens that can take the abuse but can still deliver decent images. I would relegate my 16-35 to either more "civilized" road trips or for paid work.

snegron wrote in post #19023109
Weight, size, portability. Also, walking through crowded theme parks is rough on gear especially when bumping into walls while trying to dodge crowds. I need a "beater" lens that can take the abuse but can still deliver decent images. I would relegate my 16-35 to either more "civilized" road trips or for paid work.

I use my cell phone for snapshots.

Not fast enough. Not enough resolution. In addition to my 6dmk2, I also own a Lumix GX85 with three lenses (nice, but not full frame nice), Canon 7dmk2 (great for sports, way too heavy for my travel needs), Canon T6 (nice, but not full frame nice), Nikon D750 with several prime lenses (nice, but too nice to bang around in theme parks), plus several old dslr's and point and shoots.

I like my 6dmk2 becase it is a full frame, light camera (no, I don't have any plans on buying an RP as I tried it but didn't like it). All I need is a good, solid, inexpensive UW zoom lens for my 6dmk2.

ed rader wrote in post #19023113
I use my cell phone for snapshots.

Same here... I had a 16-34 F4, sold it.... will eventually pick up a new one, but just use my cell for occasional documentation shots... I do miss the 16-35 at times however...

Heya,

The 17-40 F4L is a good old lens. It's not sharp wide open compared to what we have today. But it's still a great little lens. Stop it down to F8 and it's pretty sharp. Handles sun flare great. Inexpensvie used, $350 is common, good overall build, focus is snappy and its quiet. Good overall lens. Great for your purposes.

If you want something newer, look at Tamron's 17-35 for EOS, though its a bigger lens.

You could also look at the 24-105 F4L IS or the 24-105 STM too, if those are not too big for you.

Otherwise, do you really need wider than your 28mm?

I eventually replaced my Canon full frame and 17-40 with a Fuji X-T1 and Samyang 12mm F2. I vastly prefer it. I never used my 17-40 anywhere near 40. This is smaller. Sharper. Faster. And dead quiet.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/ZYvf​QL

Thanks for the info! I tried using the 28, 50 and 85 combo but quickly realized that it was a bad idea to do so while in theme parks; usually I am slathered with sunscreen and there is never a decent, clean spot to stand in to change lenses. I opted for just leaving the 28 on, but found it too limiting when trying to get a few closeups of my kids on rides. Ideally the 24-105 would be perfect, but then there's the weight issue. Walking around all day with even a 1 pound camera becomes painful after the first 2 hours. That's why I have purchased and experimented with lighter setups (Lumix, T6, etc.). Unfortunately the lighter cameras I have owned have not produced images anywhere near what I get with my full frames.

So, the happy medium in this case is my 6dmk2 with a lighter, more versatile lens.

I can relate.

I went from several full frames, including 1D series, with big fast primes because I liked them. But once you have a family and you're in close quarters or just wanting to have an every day carry that isn't taxing to grip and carry, smaller options become attractive. Not trying to sell Fuji to you, but just sharing my own experience with where I went with things. I wanted smaller, lighter and still wanted the option for fast primes. I also wanted mirrorless for the sake of electronic shutter and stuff like that for dead silent operation. I heavily favor wider lenses with the kids and when I go out, because it will always work and you can be creative with composition with wide angle to make a good photo, where as you can be literally stuck with a long focal length if you're just too close. My 17-40 was my go-to for this at first. I parked it at 17mm all the time, F8 and just didn't even focus, just set and forget. Then I realized, I didn't even need the zoom because I was always on the wide end. I moved over to a Fuji X-T1 body, still has a great sensor, handles low light, but the 12mm F2 became the option. It's sharp at F2. It can be stopped down and hyperfocal distance focused, and I just compose and shoot. Never worrying about missed focus, when in a crowded or busy place. I like that. I can just pay attention to exposure and composition, no more fiddling with focus or zooming, etc. Then just concentrate on making a decent photograph. Something that is different from a cellphone snap, which my wife produces thousands a day, so I don't need to try to compete with her on that.

Here's some every day life from my X-T1 and Samyang 12mm F2 (despite EXIF) just to give you an idea of things.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/RTPV​NB

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2hPX​nMF

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/27Pg​xEJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bNy​VHZ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2bSG​DcA

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/23ac​bPk

Very nice images!! I have thought about trying Fuji, but my wife would probably kick me to the garage for life! I have accumulated a ton of gear over the years (mostly Nikon, now catching up with Canon, dabbled with Lumix and Olympus). Luckily I use all my old gear at a photo club I run with junior high school kids!

I'm now re-thinking the idea of maybe sticking to a prime (something like a 35mm), however, knowing myself I will probably complain constantly at how I could have "gotten the shot" had I only brought a wider/longer lens...

Get a 1st gen 24-105 f4 is. It's an awesome all around general purpose lens and can be had used for under $400. It's on my 6dii almost always.

For daily use on human subjects, I find 28-50mm FL (assumes FF) to be effective. If I have to pick a single FL for daily, then it has to be 35mm.

I shoot with sigma 18-35mm on crop sensor. I wouldn’t recommend 17-40mm L; 24-50mm would be perfect if such lens exist

snegron wrote in post #19023184
Very nice images!! I have thought about trying Fuji, but my wife would probably kick me to the garage for life! I have accumulated a ton of gear over the years (mostly Nikon, now catching up with Canon, dabbled with Lumix and Olympus). Luckily I use all my old gear at a photo club I run with junior high school kids!

I'm now re-thinking the idea of maybe sticking to a prime (something like a 35mm), however, knowing myself I will probably complain constantly at how I could have "gotten the shot" had I only brought a wider/longer lens...

I do that too... same reason.

For that, I use a Fuji X-100S. It's a small, range finder style body, with a 35mm F2 equivalent lens. Fantastic. Leaf shutter, dead silient, and will sync any shutter speed with onboard TTL flash. It's my overall daily carry. While 35mm FOV is wide, it's not ultrawide, but it handles 99% of situations that do not demand ultrawide. I use this to pass it around too, so I can be in photos with my family too and not just being the camera guy.

It's really small and light. 23mm F2 lens (pancake, its flat!) on APS-C sensor. Again, not trying to sell it, just pointing out that there are other options. This camera is literally like $250 for the entire thing these days...

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/235k​XRZ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2hZR​vT7

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/YP9m​DU

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/QkF6​g2

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2i35​Wzo

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2fBJ​wST

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2grY​5NZ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2dDS​hjH

When I want to go lightweight and compact on my 6D I use my EF40 f2.8 STM pancake. I know its not as wide as you want but it sure is small and light and the image quality is good.