Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM or ?????

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by dustinpedley, Aug 23, 2009.

  1. dustinpedley

    dustinpedley TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Missoula MT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I am starting to get more and more into landscape photography and I am looking for a good wide angle lens and I don't need one that's all that fast.

    I have been looking at this lens for some time, I have also looked at the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM are there any others I should be looking at

    I like the range of the cannon but is it good threw the entire range?
     
  2. rufus5150

    rufus5150 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The sigma 10-20mm on a crop sensor body is simply amazing for landscape shots. The 17-40 is more of a walk-around lens on a crop sensor, but it will suffice (I shot most of my landscapes with an 18 mm on the wide-end zoom before I got the sigma). The 17-40L is a solid performer with extremely manageable distortion at the wide and as well as fully racked out.
     
  3. dustinpedley

    dustinpedley TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Missoula MT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I probably should say that I plan on upgrading to a full frame some time within the next year
     
  4. rufus5150

    rufus5150 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The 10-20mm will vignette heavily on a full frame body.
     
  5. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,441
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The 17-40 is a good Canon L lens but for my money I chose the 16-35 f2.8L MkII. EF lens, faster when needed and paired with my 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 they make an outstanding combo.

    Down side to the 16-35..... $$$$.
     
  6. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    For landscape photography, on a full frame camera, the 17-40mm F4 L is one of the best. Great price and great performance.

    The 16-35mm F2.8 L, is also nice, but much more expensive and I don't know if one stop is all that important on such a wide lens. Besides, most people shoot landscapes at smaller apertures, not larger ones, so F2.8 wouldn't get as much use.

    Keep in mind, that 17mm isn't all that wide on your current camera. Not really any wider than your 18-55mm lens. So if you want a wide lens for right now, then I'd suggest the Sigma or the Canon EF-S 10-22mm (I have the Canon). But of course, neither of those two lenses is meant to be used on a full frame body, so wouldn't be of much use when you do upgrade.

    My advice, if you are planning on upgrading to full frame, is to just go ahead and buy the wide (10mm) lens...maybe a used one. Then when you upgrade, you can sell it....maybe for near as much as you bought it for.
     
  7. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,441
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Big Mike is correct about the 16-35. I use it for a lot of different purposes where f2.8 is needed. I hate to buy anything as a single task item, thus my choice of the 16-35. It was expensive and not for everybody. But since you were looking for ideas, I thought I would toss it into the mix.
     
  8. mariusz

    mariusz TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I used the 17-40 for couple years and than upgraded to 16-35 2.8. I find them both great although 17-40 is half the price - I would recommend it.
     
  9. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,821
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Another note about the 16-35mm...
    A wedding photographer friend of mine likes to shoot wide and into the sun. He really doesn't like the flare characteristics of this lens. He said the 17-40mm is a little better but his favorite is actually the EF-S 10-22mm. He's gone so far as to hack his 10-22mm so that he can use it on his 1 series bodies (even though it vignettes at the wide end).
     
  10. usayit

    usayit No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,523
    Likes Received:
    344
    Location:
    North New Jersey, United States of America
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Is there any additional information regarding this... Samples? description of the "hack"? I would consider this for a 1D MII
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
17-40mm for weddings
,

17-40mm wedding

,
can you use the canon ef 17-40mm f/4 l usm to shoot a wedding
,
canon ef 17-40mm f/4.0l usm canonistas
,
canon ef 17-40mm f/4l usm wedding
,
canon ef 17-40mm f4 l usm vs canon ef-s 10-22mm usm f3.5-4.5
,
successful use of canon 17-40mm for model shoots
,
wedding 17-40mm
,
weddings canon ef 17-40mm f/4l
,
which is better ef 17-40mm f/4l usm or the ef-s10-22mm f3.5-4.5 usm