User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: 17-40mm

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    17-40mm

    Misleading title in some respects, however I am tossing up between the 17-40mm and 15-85mm. On the grey market, they are around the same price. I guess my main consideration is that if I upgrade to full frame in the future, the 17-40mm will move with me. However the 15-85mm offers more scope for width at the lower end. I already have a 100mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.8 outside of my 2 kit lenses so am not too bothered by the 85mm, although might be useful in a walk around type situation?

    My main interests for this lens would be landscape & inside shots ie churches or parties and the like.

    Any thoughts?
    My gear: Canon 450D, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 50mm f/1.8 II, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and EF-S55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, Canon 430EX II. My Flickr


  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    05 Aug 2007
    Location
    Paralowie, South Australia
    Posts
    545
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Although I have never used the 15-85, I have the 17-40mm lens currently as my main lens on a cropped sensor. I am very pleased with it, it does everything I have asked of it and I am sure it can do a whole lot more. I find it terrific for landscapes, starscapes and everything else I shoot (mainly widerfield) You can't go wrong with the 17-40mm a great L'series lens. Once on the full frame I can't wait to see the results with it.
    Andrew.
    comments and criticisms are always appreciated.
    Unless I post into the "NOT FOR CRITIQUE" section then the above doesn't apply.


  3. #3
    Member KeeFy's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Mar 2011
    Location
    Newtown
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    Misleading title in some respects, however I am tossing up between the 17-40mm and 15-85mm. On the grey market, they are around the same price. I guess my main consideration is that if I upgrade to full frame in the future, the 17-40mm will move with me. However the 15-85mm offers more scope for width at the lower end. I already have a 100mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.8 outside of my 2 kit lenses so am not too bothered by the 85mm, although might be useful in a walk around type situation?

    My main interests for this lens would be landscape & inside shots ie churches or parties and the like.

    Any thoughts?
    If you're not sure about going full frame. Get the 15-85. It's a smashing lens and much much better than the 17-40 on crop. The 17-40 is only viable if you're sure you're going FF. I've heard this way too many times "planning for the future". Most people don't get out of crop.

    The 17-40 is redundant in the sense where you're carrying extra glass which you don't use. A much shorter focal length. 15mm vs 17mm on crop is massively different as well. You get constant f4 aperture tho. In which if that is a consideration i would recommend the 17-55 which out resolves the 17-40 on crop, is 1 stop faster and has 3 stop IS. Only missing bit is the EGO (red ring), weather sealing and price (not by much).

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    21 Aug 2011
    Location
    Frankston
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had/am having a very similar dilemma, I made a thread about it not to long ago, and got some pretty insightful comments as well as alternative comments
    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?93501-Choosing-an-everyday-Lens

    H
    ope that helps some how.

    but yeah the real question is whether or not an upgrade to full frame will happen, since tht 15-85 trumps the 17-40 in a lot of ways, Focal range, IS, faster aperture (just) and is a couple dollars cheaper.
    Canon 60D - 24-105 F4 L - Sigma 10-20 - Kit lenses - 50mm F:1.8 - Tamron 90mm F:2.8 Macro - 430 exII _ Extension Tube Set


  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Apr 2010
    Location
    Bribie Is Sunny South East
    Posts
    1,047
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I went through the same deal earlier this year. I thought I'd never go full frame, so went the 15-85 just like Keefy above said. Yes it is a great lens, but be careful making the decision now saying you'll never go full frame. It was a mistake on my part! I am currently going full frame so now need to make the purchase all over again and get the 17-40, which I wished I had just done in the first place! Then I'll be left with a 15-85 which will probably not get used and eventually sold for a loss on the second hand market. So the message is, thnk very carefully about what you mainly like to shoot - is what you shoot going to benefit from going full frame, is staying with a crop going to end up frustrating you and then you'll decide there a very real chance you'll want to go FF. If you think it may be an option, go the EF lens because you'll kick yourself later if you don't. And if you don't go FF, well, the 17-40 is still a really darn good lens on a crop camera anyway!
    Lloyd
    Canon 5D2+40D+L+Σ+S100
    Never make the same mistake twice, there are so many new ones, try a different one each day
    Flickr

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    21 Aug 2011
    Location
    Frankston
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    why would you go FF now LJG?

    with the the new 1D very close, and the 5DMKII being out for 2+ years and speculations of the mark 3 coming out next year, seems to me as though the wait would be worth it.

    if that meant saving a lot on the 5D MKII or getting all the additions of the MKIII?

  7. #7
    Member KeeFy's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Mar 2011
    Location
    Newtown
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You can still resell the 15-85 when you go full frame. The 2mm on the wide end is significant for landscapes. You get 85mm as well which gives very good subject isolation should you wish to get some bokeh.

    I personally will take the 15-85 over the 17-40 should you not be considering going FF. I bought the 17-55 for my 7D and have recently gone FF as well. I still don't regret buying the 17-55. Another point to consider is that if you do go FF, you may keep your old crop camera and you can use the 15-85 on it anytime as well should you wish not to sell it.

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you all for that advice.

    Truth be told, I had my heart set on the 15-85mm until someone got in my ear about it not being full frame and that I would be wasting my money. I really would like a 5D however realistically it will be a few years away.

    The reasons I was considering the 15-85 & 17-40 were that they were a similar price. I could keep saving for the 24-70 but I don't think it would offer me the width for landscape that I'm after? The 17-55 is another option but it is very expensive also and again only for a crop sensor.

    It is perhaps something I will need to resolve myself to that these lenses can be sold later on "if" I upgrade.

    Oh for an unlimited pool of money! One can only dream.
    Last edited by rbat; 07-11-2011 at 6:20am.

  9. #9
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    793
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    My main interests for this lens would be landscape & inside shots ie churches or parties and the like. Any thoughts?
    Using a 450D, neither lens is generally suitable for: "inside shots i.e. churches or parties and the like" unless you are using Flash, which you do not list in your "My Gear”.

    The 15 to 85 has the IS advantage of shooting inside Churches and other buildings, without Flash and without a tripod, if there are no people or other moving bits in the shot.

    If you do not intend to use flash (or a tripod) for these inside church shots and do not intend to use a flash for the party shots a fast and wider prime than your 50/1.8, would be my suggestion, like a 28/1.8 or (more money) 24/1.4. The difficulty is there is not much wide (on APS-C) which is still fast and the 450D is not fantastic in the High ISO stakes - There is a Sigma 20/1.8.

    (The 15 to 85 does NOT have a faster aperture across the zoom – it does have a faster aperture only from FL = 15mm to FL ≈ 17mm; at about FL = 18mm it is max at F/4; at about FL = 26mm it is max at F/4.5: it reaches max F/5.6 at about FL = 55mm)

    WW

  10. #10
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi WW,

    You are absolutely right about the 450D. 1600 is very noisy, 800 can be acceptable depending on the situation. I am currently looking into getting a flash, either the 430 or 580. Do you have any thoughts about this? The usage would be mostly for indoor social gatherings like parties & weddings where I am a guest & the odd church interior (this is not a huge interest of mine).

    I used the 24/1.4 a while back. It is a beautiful lens but it is a bit too narrow for landscape on my crop sensor. So I feel that the 28/1.8 would fall into that category also. The 20/1.8 might work, I would have to look into that a bit further.

    My 3 choices would be the 15-85 (first) and then the 17-40 (which I'm now not sure about because of the discussion here) & the 17-55 (which is very expensive).

  11. #11
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    793
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    I am currently looking into getting a flash, either the 430 or 580. Do you have any thoughts about this? The usage would be mostly for indoor social gatherings like parties & weddings where I am a guest & the odd church interior (this is not a huge interest of mine).
    I always suggest buying the 580MkII in preference to the 430MkII. You have more power if you need it, a Flash lasts a long time and over that time, the price dif. is not that much.


    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    I used the 24/1.4 a while back. It is a beautiful lens but it is a bit too narrow for landscape on my crop sensor. So I feel that the 28/1.8 would fall into that category also. The 20/1.8 might work, I would have to look into that a bit further.
    The Prime lenses I was NOT suggesting for Landscape work – if for parties and social gatherings you are going to use Flash – then I don’t suggest at all that you need another fast Prime, ATM

    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    My 3 choices would be the 15-85 (first) and then the 17-40 (which I'm now not sure about because of the discussion here) & the 17-55 (which is very expensive).
    Of those three lenses, my opinion is you will get much more use from the 15 to 85.

    However to throw some more thinking your way:

    > In relation to Landscape work) what is the problem with the 18 to 55 – it can produce quite good landscape work if it is used at F/7 to F/10 and if you use adequate lens hood and no filter.

    > Also the 18 to 55 would work just fine with a Flash at parties.

    > And the extra 20mm reach (55 to 85) is not that much really.


    I would be looking at something to expend your wide – like with a 10 to 22 ish zoom lens I think you would have a much more rounded Landscape and general kit with that additional lens.


    WW

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    23 Nov 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,086
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I own a 17-40 l have had it for couple of years now and I can say that it's a fantastic lens very sharp and I tend to use it a lot even on the 7d I now own a 5d mark 2 and it is exceptionally good I am not sure about the 15 -85 never used one before but I would buy the 17-40 for the following reasons a L lens so the built quality will be much better than the 15-85 (metal vs plastic) so more weather sealing I find this extremely useful for landscapes. The 17-40 l lens does not extend when zoomed in keeping it nice and small but the 15-85 extends and can be a bit troublesome to use and does not come with a hood. They are just some reasons.
    Dwarak Calayampundi

    Canon 5D Mark II, 7 D Lens Canon 24-105mm L Canon 16-35mm II L Canon 100mm Sigma 10-20mm Canon 50mm 1.8
    http://www.wix.com/dwarak/landscapes

  13. #13
    Member KeeFy's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Mar 2011
    Location
    Newtown
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwarak View Post
    I own a 17-40 l have had it for couple of years now and I can say that it's a fantastic lens very sharp and I tend to use it a lot even on the 7d I now own a 5d mark 2 and it is exceptionally good I am not sure about the 15 -85 never used one before but I would buy the 17-40 for the following reasons a L lens so the built quality will be much better than the 15-85 (metal vs plastic) so more weather sealing I find this extremely useful for landscapes. The 17-40 l lens does not extend when zoomed in keeping it nice and small but the 15-85 extends and can be a bit troublesome to use and does not come with a hood.
    I don't get the argument of it not extending. How does it affect the user?

    If you think the 17-40 is sharp on a crop, you should try the 17-55 @ f4 on a crop. 15-85 is sharper than the 17-40 as well on a crop.
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...mp=2&APIComp=0 << 15-85 vs 17-40



    William made excellent points. If you want to do any indoor work, you can't go wrong with a fast prime or a flash. I personally will go wth a fast prime like the Sigma 30 f1.4 but it may be a little too tight for cramped environments.

    Another recommendation to consider. For the same price you can pick up a 17-50mm f2.8 Tamaron NON-VC + 580EXII. Pick up the tamron 2nd hand as they don't retain their value as much. Expect to pay about $300 or less for the 17-50. I sold mine for $300 with a hoya CPL and filter about a year ago.

    DWI has it at $304 + $434 for both lenses new. Comes up to about the same price vs the 17-40. The Tamron outperforms the 17-40L as well and is even smaller than the 17-40.

    Am i confusing you yet? :P

  14. #14
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi again WW, you are right. The 18-55 does produce some lovely landscape work. If you look in my Flickr link, there are quite a few in my Adelaide folder. I don't have a lens hood, so perhaps that might make a difference in my work.

    I really hate using it indoors, so perhaps getting a 580 might increase the work rate that I'm currently getting out of it. I'm just not sure if it is too heavy for the 450D.

    I definitely was attracted more to the 15 rather than the 85 as I saw a video on YouTube that showed the difference between what you could get at 15. I hadn't really considered the 10-22, do you have this lens? Recommend?

    KeeFy, definitely haven't confused me. I am not keen on 3rd party lenses as if I do upgrade in the future, and there is a very good chance I will, I would like to retain some re-sale value. However, I'm not totally against it, just not super keen.
    Last edited by rbat; 08-11-2011 at 10:38am.

  15. #15
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    793
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    I don't have a lens hood, so perhaps that might make a difference in my work.
    Shielding the lens will work also, especially for those shots where the sun is into the lens.
    Lens hoods are a compromise for zoom lenses, anyway, as the FL changes.

    Adelaide Folder is very nice, thank you – you might consider a couple of matters working with that 18 to 55 to extract the more from it.

    Just as examples – “Henley Beach Jetty” – that lens actually works much better at about FL = 22mm than at FL = 18mm especially regarding the fringing: so if you can go wide, but not fully wide.

    Also – you pulled ISO 800, perhaps ISO 400 and drop the shutter to 1/320s – the extra length on the shutter speed would not affect the water that much, I don’t think

    Also you might just be a tad underexposed with that as there is a bit more than a bit of colour noise in the shadows.

    Also it really looks like you have a filter on the lens – if so get rid of it when you shoot into the light – if it is not a filter then a little bit of shading the lens would be good as you have a bit of internal flare (Veiling Flare) robbing you of some tonal range and contrast – chuck a big towel over your head and extend it to as far as you can as a shield for the lens, but not let it be in the shot.

    And if you are not using one – use a tripod – it will keep the camera steady sure – but more importantly it will give you pause to control the shot as it will slow you down and make you think. . . and a tripod would have been very useful for the shot of the stained glass inside St Peter's Church – to allow you to pull maybe 2~4 seconds and drop the ISO to ISO200 or, alternatively, make a sandwich of three shots for HDRI (High Dynamic Range Imaging).

    ***

    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    I really hate using it [the 18 to 55] indoors, so perhaps getting a 580 might increase the work rate that I'm currently getting out of it. I'm just not sure if it is too heavy for the 450D.
    The 580 Flash will be fine mounted on a 450D.

    ***

    Quote Originally Posted by rbat View Post
    I definitely was attracted more to the 15 rather than the 85 as I saw a video on YouTube that showed the difference between what you could get at 15. I hadn't really considered the 10-22, do you have this lens? Recommend?
    I have not used that lens.
    This discussion is presently happening re super wide angle zooms for Canon APS-C:



    WW
    Last edited by William W; 08-11-2011 at 11:17am. Reason: spelling errors corrected

  16. #16
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi WW,

    Thanks for that advice. I will definitely keep the 22mm in mind next time I head down to the beach. I did also under expose the shot because of how bright the sun was going down. I agree with you about the noise in the shadows.

    I actually don't own any filters yet. I'm only really a beginner in many regards but am now seeking out more information to move myself forward. I do have a tripod and will take that with me in future. I'm a little lazy it seems!

    Thanks for pointing me in the direction of that discussion. I'm thinking I still have a bit more reading to do before I commit to purchasing anything. I will get a hood though for my 18-55, just need to work out what size to get.

    There seems to be lots of rave reviews for the Tokina & Sigma lenses, so perhaps I was too quick to dismiss the Tamron also. I might be a bit of a Canon snob deep down...

  17. #17
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    793
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    . . . Oh yes sunsets are difficult beasts to nab - often best just after the sun has disappeared.
    Don't get too strung out about the lens hood, just practice shielding the lenses from glare/flare - difficult to do as you need to "see" the flare in the viewfinder and you are also looking into the sun.

    Good that you knew you were underexposed.

    I have been having a squiz at your other work on flickr - it is a nice creative eye you have for the still life - very appealing - I think you will excel at macro.

    WW

  18. #18
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    29 Sep 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have been having a squiz at your other work on flickr - it is a nice creative eye you have for the still life - very appealing - I think you will excel at macro.
    Thank you. I love macro as you can probably tell by looking at my photos. My 100mm also is a wonderful portrait lens.

    You have motivated me to have another go with my kit lens! 22mm, shielding and tripoding...
    Last edited by rbat; 08-11-2011 at 3:11pm.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •