17-40L Does this make sense

[troutfisher]

Hi All
Just thought I would ask this ,it seems sensible to me but I could be wrong.
I have the following
Canon 5Dc
Canon 40D
Canon 24/105
Canon 70/200 F4
Canon 100/400
The 40D +100/400 is my wildlife setup,due largely to the 1.6 crop factor and the frame rate on the 40D.
The 5Dc +24/105+70/200 is my walkabout gear.
I dont have a UWA for the 5D nor do I have a shortish zoom for the 40D ( did have a siggy 10/20 but sold it)
It seems to me that a 17/40L will do two jobs ,an UWA on the 5D,(it will also fit well with the 70/200) and a med tele on the 40D ( the 24/105 is a bit long at the short end).
Any bright thoughts, much as I would like a 16/35 L money wise its not on and the siggy 12/24 wont take 77mm filters , and the Canon 17/40 is cheaper than the Tokina

Thanks in advance

Chris

 

[33L]

very similar to my setup 5DII & 50D
the 17-40 works well on both, the supplied hood is next to useless on crop and might be worth investing in an alternative for the crop setup.

 

[arad85]

Yup.. Makes sense. The only thing I have extra to you is a GP walkabout on the crop. I almost never take the 15-85 off the 7D. Having said that, the cameras are often in use at the same time as Ms arad85 takes photos too... BTW, the 17-40 is quite a bit better than the 12-24 IMHO (but - obviously - doesn't go to 12mm on FF which is why I have both!!)

 

[Craikeybaby]

Another vote here, 17-40 works well on both my 5D and my 20D.