Wedding Lens Question re: 17-40

I am not a commercial wedding photographer. However, I bring my gear to weddings of friends and families and manage to get some decent shots. I was looking to get a little faster lens to replace the 17-85 F4-5.6 for lower light shots.

I have a 70-200 F2.8 and 17-85 F4-5.6 &80EX. Was considering purchase of a decently priced second hand 17-40 for a "sort of" replacement of the 17-85 with a F4. I realize the reach of the 17-40 is shorter than the 17-85, however does the F4 make up for the zoom short coming wedding environment?

I don't have the funds for the common 24-70 F2.8, but was looking for a little more light into the camera for those lower light scenarios and keeping
my budget in mind.

Does this lens make sens as a replacement for the 17-85?

Feedback?
Thanks

With your 17-85 you have the F4 up to ~40mm. So why are you going to get rid of that to buy a lens with less distance and really no improvement of f-stop?

tamron makes a 28-70 2.8 that you may want to check out since the 24-70 is a bit too pricey.

ogre1231 wrote in post #6280441
tamron makes a 28-70 2.8 that you may want to check out since the 24-70 is a bit too pricey.

+1 on the comment above. You can pic this lens up second hand for about $300. The optics are pretty comparable to the L series in this range. Of course the L series might have a little faster AF but to save a ton of money it isn't a bad choice. Instead of dropping over a grand on the 70-200 L/2.8 I am even looking at the Sigma and Tamron 70 -200 2.8

Mike

best lens to get is a 17-55mm 2.8 IS you can find them b/w $800 (if you're really lucky) - $950 used.

col127 wrote in post #6280599
best lens to get is a 17-55mm 2.8 IS you can find them b/w $800 (if you're really lucky) - $950 used.

I agree, 17-55mm 2.8 IS = Home Run!

89Bowtie wrote in post #6280337
=89'Bowtie;6280337]I am not a commercial wedding photographer. However, I bring my gear to weddings of friends and families and manage to get some decent shots. I was looking to get a little faster lens to replace the 17-85 F4-5.6 for lower light shots.

I have a 70-200 F2.8 and 17-85 F4-5.6 &80EX. Was considering purchase of a decently priced second hand 17-40 for a "sort of" replacement of the 17-85 with a F4. I realize the reach of the 17-40 is shorter than the 17-85, however does the F4 make up for the zoom short coming wedding environment?

I don't have the funds for the common 24-70 F2.8, but was looking for a little more light into the camera for those lower light scenarios and keeping
my budget in mind.

Does this lens make sens as a replacement for the 17-85?

Feedback?
Thanks

col127 wrote in post #6280599
best lens to get is a 17-55mm 2.8 IS you can find them b/w $800 (if you're really lucky) - $950 used.

If he doesn't have/want to spend the money on a 24-70 L, which by the way is a better lens....why would he spend the same money on the 17-55???

I would look at the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or 28-75 f2.8, you can get both of those for the price of the 17-55, and still have money for a few filters and dinner out while your shopping for them!

I have the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and have been very very happy with it. The only thing I dislike is that it makes noise focusing unlike the Canon USM lenses, but you get use to it. Lately I am starting to use more fast primes now due to the cost, and the close IQ to the L zooms.

F4 on the 17 - 40 is too slow for wedding photography. I used to use it & now have a 17-55 2.8 IS. The difference between the two is huge in a wedding environment.

cheers

damian

tamron 17-50 2.8...

one of my most favourite lens...awesome sharp...
great speed, and a great price...

i always have it on one of my cameras for a wedding..

benny

magik306 wrote in post #6280989
I agree, 17-55mm 2.8 IS = Home Run!

I use the 17-55mm 2.8 IS for weddings and love it. Sharp, fast and works great in low light.

17-40 is a very nice lens, very sharp and contrasty shame its just a little slow for some wedding circumstances but if your not the paid pro that has to get shots then that shouldnt be too much of an issue anyway, deffo one of the best value lenses out there imo.

17-55 is a very nice performing lens but the build quality/reliability isnt good, read any photo forums and you will find quite a few people who have had issues with it. Weve had 2 of them between me and my shooting partner since we started up and 42 weddings later we are now onto our 4th and 5th copies of this lens with some of them going back to canon several times due to problems or failing completely. My shooting partner has finally given up and is selling his to get a 24-70 (and a 5D / 5D MKII eventually) and my current copy is limping along with a broken IS until we have done our last 2 weddings of this year and then its going back to CPS... once its fixed I arent sure what I will do with.. probably take the same route as Nick, 5D + 24-70.

17-85, I actually have one but after using it for our first ever wedding I realised it was just way too soft for professional work and so it was replaced with the 17-55 F2.8 IS and weve carried it as an emergency backup only since then ..... which you definitely need if your using the 17-55 F2.8 IS !