Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 04 Oct 2006 (Wednesday) 04:51
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Canon 17-40 a little long in the tooth?

 
ScottE
Goldmember
3,179 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Kelowna, Canada
     
Oct 04, 2006 21:32 |  #31

Sorry the 17-55/2.8 IS EF-S is out of your price range. I haven't used my 17-40/4 on a digital camera since I got the 17-55. (It still makes a great super wide angle on my old film camera.) The 17-55 is just a more useable lens. If I was buying again I would save and get the 17-55 before I got another 17-40.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrmarklin
Senior Member
608 posts
Likes: 89
Joined Aug 2006
Location: People's Republik of Kalifornia
     
Oct 04, 2006 23:04 as a reply to  @ ScottE's post |  #32

Get the Canon. You are not actually counting the true costs of either lens. Not that you would ever sell a Canon lens (God forbid!!!!!) but the resale value of the Canon over the Tamron would do even more to equalize the cost.

I'm a Canon only guy, and have had exactly no buyer's remorse about spending the extra money. No anguish and "what ifs" about owning a third party lens. Buy Canon.......Sleep Well.:lol:


Canon EOS 5D also Mk III, 24-70L, 85 IIL, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8 IS L, 180 Macro L, 100 f/2.8L IS Macro, 100-400 L IS, 8-15 L Fisheye f/4, 16-35 L, 50 L , TS-E 24 L, 600 L, Extender 1.4X & 2X II, Speedlite 580EX x 2, MT-24EX Macro Twin Lite, ST-E2, Angle Finder C, RS-80N3 Remote Switch, Focusing Screen EE-D, BG-E4, Manfrotto 458B Neotec tripodw/Acratech 1155 GP Ballhead.:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
siejones
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,267 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: UK
     
Oct 05, 2006 02:14 |  #33

Well thanks to you all!

I have taken the plunge and the advice of yoursleves and others from other forums has swayed my decision and I have gone for the 17-40.


Technical perfection is only ever important if it improves the asthetic. It is not the precursor to beauty. Not in art..not in music and not in photography!

My Flickr account link (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,200 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 546
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Munich
     
Oct 05, 2006 03:08 |  #34

I regretted my descision not to buy the 17-40, when I had a 350D, the moment I upgraded to a 5D! A good choice the 17-40, you won't regret it - just don't pay the full price at Jessops !!


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.com (external link)

http://www.natureimmor​tal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goatee
"nice but dim"
Avatar
5,239 posts
Joined May 2005
Location: North of London, UK
     
Oct 05, 2006 04:24 |  #35

You don't want an L - they're over-hyped, over-priced, oh, hang on a sec, I've sold my Sigma and now have an L. Erm, they're great!

Ok - I was totally joking, but they're both fine lenses, whatever makes you happy!


D7100, 50mm f/1.8, 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6, 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR, SB800
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=552906flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Peter777
Hatchling
1 post
Joined Oct 2006
     
Oct 05, 2006 04:29 |  #36

hi im looking for a manual of canon s3 IS in german language please help ,me anyone i need it in pdf formate give me some diredt link t6o download.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fi20100
Slightly late
Avatar
3,587 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Finland
     
Oct 05, 2006 05:16 |  #37

Peter777, you're way in the wrong thread / forum section. Not a good start! Welcome to the forum anyway!


Stefan
5D3, 5Dc, 5Dc, 40D + 17-40L, 24-70L, 70-200L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100L Macro and some other stuff.
flickr (external link), 5∞px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
curiousgeorge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,920 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 214
Joined Feb 2006
Location: London
     
Oct 05, 2006 06:30 |  #38

Probably a bit late but it's pointless listening to anyone's advice. Buying lenses is a game of luck because you might get a bad copy or an exceptionally good one.

That's why so many people disagree on what is the sharpest.


Photos from my travels (external link)
Canon EOS R6 MkII | Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L | Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L | Samyang 14mm f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
siejones
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,267 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: UK
     
Oct 05, 2006 06:34 |  #39

curiousgeorge: I am aware of that but it's not the only reason people disagree and from what I here it is less likely you will get a bad copy of an L than third party

Thanks


Technical perfection is only ever important if it improves the asthetic. It is not the precursor to beauty. Not in art..not in music and not in photography!

My Flickr account link (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
curiousgeorge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,920 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 214
Joined Feb 2006
Location: London
     
Oct 05, 2006 06:51 |  #40

For what it's worth my vote was for the Canon. Well good luck and let us know what you think of yours.


Photos from my travels (external link)
Canon EOS R6 MkII | Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L | Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L | Samyang 14mm f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zacker
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,006 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Oxford, CT.
     
Oct 05, 2006 07:00 |  #41

get the 17-40, I love mine look at the test images posted in the 1st page here, the canon has great color I stick a CP on mine and its incredible!
but if its the $$$ issue, get what you can afford... you can always PP in PS.


http://www.theanimalha​ven.com (external link)
My Facebook, Friend me If you want!http://www.facebook.co​m/brokenfencephotograp​hy (external link)

http://www.facebook.co​m/theanimalhaven?ref=t​s (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,475 views & 0 likes for this thread, 26 members have posted to it.
Canon 17-40 a little long in the tooth?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2925 guests, 168 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.