Canon EF 17-40mm f/2.8L

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Soldier7518, Aug 13, 2010.

  1. Soldier7518

    Soldier7518 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Baghdad & Washington
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Sorry, I meant 17-35mm f/2.8L
    Its 1:30am lol

    Any opinions? Reliable?
     
  2. Idahophoto

    Idahophoto TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Idaho
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The old one or new one the new is the 16-35/2.8 I have not used this lens but have heard many reviews on it saying it's a incredible lens and much better than the 17-40/4L. So yeah, I would buy one if I had the promes I wanted first and after the 24-70 & 70-200/2.8's
     
  3. j-digg

    j-digg TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    476
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Minne-snow-ta
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Damn, you should really change the name of this thread if possible, got me excited :(
     
  4. bentcountershaft

    bentcountershaft Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Location:
    Southern Indiana, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    From what I've read and seen the only advantage of the 16-35 over the 17-40 is a wider aperture. Image quality at equal apertures and focal lengths show little if any advantage of one over the other.
     
  5. Soldier7518

    Soldier7518 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2010
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Baghdad & Washington
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Any moderator feel free to delete, I'll repost.
     
  6. bentcountershaft

    bentcountershaft Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Location:
    Southern Indiana, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    They were both 16-35's. The original version wasn't as consistent in focusing as the newer version and wasn't as sharp in the corners from what I remember reading. If you need 2.8 the newer version is apparently the way to go. If not get the 17-40.
     
  7. cfusionpm

    cfusionpm TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
  8. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,443
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yep. I love my 16-35 f2.8LII. The 17-40 is a nice piece of glass, but I was not willing to compromise speed for cost on this one. If cost is the issue, I would look at the Tamron 17-50 f2.8. Fast, great optics, cheaper plastic build and noisy motor and only for crop sensor but IQ wise I found it to rival the 17-40 from Canon.

    If money is not the issue, 16-35 f2.8LII. It is hard to put down.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
17-40mm f/2.8
,

17-40mm 2.8

,
17-40 2.8
,

canon 17-40mm 2.8

,
canon 17-40mm f 2.8l
,
canon 17-40mm f2.8
,
canon ef 17-40 2.8
,
canon ef 17-40mm f/4l versus canon ef-s 17-55mm f/2.8
,
canon ef 17-40mmf2.8
,
lensa canon ef 17-40mm/2,8