Weather sealed? 17-40 would be my pick with a filter. Shame in a way because that can potentially exacerbate flare but I think ultra wide is the way to go for night work... That's my preferred style anyway. Most things on my page are shot with a 17-40 although I rarely light paint.
I checked out your work,pretty amazing stuff how do you go about shooting i mean settings gear,lights if any ,postprocessing etc
I guess you have shorter exposures ,under a minute.
P.S : how sharp would the 17-40 be on a 7d ??
Thanks for that - most of my night photography is at least 2 minutes. Some exceed 6-7 minutes. Settings-wise:
ISO200 (normally), no filters at all, 2 minutes on average, F8. Post processing for colour and contrast etc - only levels and curves and some selective dodge and burn. Mostly just Lightroom workflow (99% of the time).
With regards to the lens, I think the 17-40 would arguably be sharper on crop given the edges are cropped away (which are the weak bits on FF) - but it would not have the dynamism of UWA on the 7D. I used a 10-22 for a few months on my 550D and I loved it for night work however the 17-40 on the 5D2 is a step up in IQ undoubtedly (for me). I have seen people here say the contrary but I just do not see it - the images are 'deeper', sharper and more contrasty. With regard to night photography, the 17-40 handles flare much better and starbursts are cleaner and punchier. 10-22 starbursts were always filled with untidy globules of light whereas the 17-40 ones are cleaner and just 'glow'.
So with regards to night work, I would thoroughly endorse the 17-40. A lot of people are critical of this lens and consider it inferior to the 16-35. For day work (and photojournalistic work) I suspect there might be something (vaguely) in it however for night work, this lens is a winner. Night photography makes most lenses look good
and this one is no exception.
Whilst I have a nice collection of primes and love using them for day/portrait work, I would be lost using them at night. The UWA zoom is an essential part of my work at night - as I do not have time/luxury to compose slowly and thoughtfully. The wide angle potential allows leeways, especially in tight spots.
I would be slightly wary of capping the 17-40 with a filter though, as you must to weatherproof/resist it as it may make it more prone to flare. I don't believe the 10-22 is weather resistant, regardless?
That said, the 17-40 is a great lens on FF but I feel it's a bit boring on crop. Which kind of defeats the purpose of having a flexible UWA lens for night work. I suppose it depends on what you plan to shoot (and how).
Hope this helps in some way!
wow your workflow is identical to mine!!:-)
I guess ill stick to the zoom for convenience the17-40 coz ill be upgrading to ff soon
I might neeed filters with exposures running to 10-20 minutes
Ill really miss the ability to change aperture mid exposure that way ill reduce significant time rather than letting the sky burn in
Thanks for the advice I'm almost convinced about the 17-40 but the aperture thing is still draining my attention towards it
Thanks again it was really helpful :-D
Show Posts
...
