Gear Talk > Lenses

Thinking about a 17-40 f4L USM. Thoughts?

(1/11) > >>

STEMI_RN:
I'm thinking about purchasing a 17-40 f/4L USM.  Anyone out there with one of these have any reasons why I should or should not go through with it.  It will be my first L glass.  After this I plan on a 70-200 f/2.8. 

I'm mostly a landscape/nature shooter so I don't really need it any faster (usually shoot f/8-f11 on a tripod). And I was looking at my last 6 months of shots and most of my keepers are under 50mm focal length anyway. Every review said this lens gives the best IQ for the money (and sometimes better than more expensive lenses).

If there is something else I should get in the sub $1k range, I'm open to suggestions. I'm looking for any real world experiences from this lens.  I'm just hoping to buy before the $100 rebate ends.

Thoughts?

JBeckwith:
I am also considering the 17-40.  I currently have a 24-105 f4L but I see most of my favorite landscape work is done with the 17-40.  I would be interested to hear if anyone has any personal experience with the 17-40 and how it compares to the 24-105 for landscape/nature photography.

dhofmann:
If you're using an APS-C camera like the 60D, the 15-85mm lens is sharper, wider and longer.

Policar:
The 17-40mm L is inexpensive and weather sealed and has great build quality. The center is contrasty and reasonably sharp, even wide open at 17mm. The corners are very soft until f8 or f11. Then they're sharper but with some CA. There's a lot of fall-off. But it's an inexpensive constant aperture ultrawide. For whatever strange reason, I like the bokeh.

On APS-C I would take either the 18-55mm IS or 17-55mm IS over this lens any day. I assume I'd take the 55-85mm, too. On FF, it's good for the price but it has some distortion and it's just okay optically. Not a bad lens, but not awe inspiring.

The 70-200mm f2.8 IS II is wonderful. The 70-200mm f2.8 (non-IS) is also very good if you have a tripod or steady hands and don't mind somewhat soft corners wide open; it's a very nice lens, really.

For landscape I'd go tilt shift rather than UWA zoom (you're using a tripod, so you might as well), but the price is so high! I've got big hopes for the 24mm Rokinon TS lens.

Mt Spokane Photography:
I'd reccomend the 17-55 if you have APS-C.  For FF its a fair lens.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version