Canon EOS 50D + 17-40 L = ?

vegasboy wrote in post #7415208
man i'd kill for an L lens... literally.

Literally?

I'm a UWA fan so I'd go 11-16 Tokina instead, but it's the lens of choice at that range. brilliant for many styles of shooting, but landscapes are one of my things and it's too narrow for my eyes.

L lenses often go well on stuff good advice.

I will likely be purchasing a 50D in the near future, and the two lenses that I will most likely be getting along with it, are the Tokina 11-16 f2.8, and the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 I.S. (or maybe even the Canon EF 16-35 f2.8 L II)

I already own the Tamron 90mm f2.8 1:1 Macro, and the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L lenses.

I like the bright viewfinder image that an f2.8 lens (or faster) gives, plus I plan on photographing the Aurora Borealis one day, and an f2.8 lens would allow me to use a lower ISO setting, which would hopefully result in better/nicer quality enlargements. i.e. not as noisy as a higher ISO would produce.

I also plan on getting a 1D Mark III, or whatever the next generation model is called. So the EF 16-35 f2.8L II would be usable on it. As would the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 from 13mm on up.

I did consider the Canon EF 17-40 f4L as well.

Neil B wrote in post #7414587
Just wondering if anyone used this lens on their 50D...
and if so, how do u guys like the picture quality..?
please only comment if u have used this lens...or u own one
thank you every much....

PS. i got to try this lens out at a local camera store...
and the guy there told me , if you own the 50d , its best you spend money
on good glass (L glass) to get the best results from the 50d.... is this true or was he tryin to sell me?

I'm not sure if you've missed the point of what the guy in the shop was trying to tell you. From what you've said I reckon the point he was trying to make (and correctly so) was that because of it's 15mp sensor, the 50D needs good glass and that the weaknesses in lower quality lenses can begin to show when used with this camera. This thread seems to be simply concentrating on how good the 17-40mmL is which is not really the issue.

Jesse Webb wrote in post #7415211
I'd get the 17-55/2.8 IS over the 17-40L for a crop camera like the 50D.

Agreed.

Cash wrote in post #7415398
I have the Canon 50D and the 17-40L and I love the combination! I swear that my 17-40 takes better photos then my 24-70L!

x2

love the 17-40 on my 40d

Own/onwed both. I'd purchase the 17_55IS for the 50D. Great optics. More versatility. With the 17-40L, although it is a wicked piece of glass, I think you may not prefer it indoors unless you carry a Flash everywhere.

I own both and I think it's a good combination if your are bit on a budget. Wish sometimes it more zoom but overall it is pretty versatile and IQ is fantastic. Would love to get the 17-55 /2.8IS one day though.

i was thinking of the 17-55 too instead of the 17-40

vegasboy wrote in post #7415208
man i'd kill for an L lens... literally.

That's the best comment I have read in a while

Please excuse the quality as I am a noob...

I really like the focal range of 17-40 - besides it is MUCH lighter as a walk around than the 16-35, not to mention lighter on the $$$

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Neil B wrote in post #7414587
Just wondering if anyone used this lens on their 50D...
and if so, how do u guys like the picture quality..?
please only comment if u have used this lens...or u own one
thank you every much....

PS. i got to try this lens out at a local camera store...
and the guy there told me , if you own the 50d , its best you spend money
on good glass (L glass) to get the best results from the 50d.... is this true or was he tryin to sell me?

He's right. Also the 17-40L is awesome on the 50D - especially when you use the micro AF adjust feature, lol.

Pros:
1. awesome build quality and feel, weathersealed with filter attached
2. exceptional color and contrast
3. good sharpness
4. Great flare control unlike 17-55 IS

Cons:
1. F4
2. doesn't go to 50mm
3. no IS
4. prone to copy variation
5. meh edges


Recently microadjusting the lens on my 50D has blown me away. Lens had some problems, lol. Waiting for the Sigma 10-20 3.5 to partner with it.

My 17-40L copy is incredibly sharp wideopen. I also own a Sigma 18-50EX Macro. Both lenses are amazing.

For indoor photography with no flash I typically grab a prime. Even an f/2.8 zoom it may not be fast enough indoors (unless you have some IS for stability)

The optics of the 17-40L produce excellent resolution and phenominal colours. f/4 is the limitation that some may accept. If you use flash indoors f/4 will be fine.

You may find having an f/2.8 zoom will give you more "pop" to your images. When I use my Sigma 18-50EX I will use it at f/3.2 and smaller aperatures depending on how much depth of field I want.

For the $$$ I'd suggest looking at the 17-55IS.

seriously consider the 17-55is i love it , the IS and 2.8 is great at low light situations, its a perfect walk around lens with L optics from what i've read, just not a true L lens =(.. but i love it =)

17-55 > 17-50 Tamron > 17-40L for APS-C cameras, in terms of versatility, IQ and value