Canon 17-40 f4L

U

User.30879

Suspended / Banned
Messages
745
Edit My Images
No
Hi

Have been seriously looking at getting a new lens & as all mine a prime thought this L series zoom would be the way to go plus its a lot more affordable than the 16 !

Thoughts on this lens from owners please & has anyone used it to shoot video ?

Thanks :)
 
I don't really do video but I wouldn't buy this solely for video purposes- its quite slow at F4.
I notice you are using a APS-C camera, and you should probably know that there are better options for a crop camera for a standard zoom.

The usual contenders are

Canon 17-55 2.8 (£600 )
Canon 15-85 (£400 )
Canon 17-40L F4 (£400 )
Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC (£200)

(all second hand prices)

For video a fast aperture is useful i think, so would be looking at either the faster 17-55 or Tamron 17-50. The Tamron is extremely good value for money, very sharp.. I used to have it.

I currently have both the 17-40L and 15-85 and am planning to test them both out... when I eventually find time! I have a feeling it will be the 17-40L which will get sold though.
 
travellingcello said:
I don't really do video but I wouldn't buy this solely for video purposes- its quite slow at F4.
I notice you are using a APS-C camera, and you should probably know that there are better options for a crop camera for a standard zoom.

The usual contenders are

Canon 17-55 2.8 (£600 )
Canon 15-85 (£400 )
Canon 17-40L F4 (£400 )
Tamron 17-50 2.8 non-VC (£200)

(all second hand prices)

For video a fast aperture is useful i think, so would be looking at either the faster 17-55 or Tamron 17-50. The Tamron is extremely good value for money, very sharp.. I used to have it.

I currently have both the 17-40L and 15-85 and am planning to test them both out... when I eventually find time! I have a feeling it will be the 17-40L which will get sold though.
Click to expand...

Cheers I'll look into your suggestions
 
I do not shoot video. I do use the 17-40 on both a 5D Mk II and 1 Mk III. It is a stunningly sharp lens.
 
I've been looking at second hand 17-55 f2.8 recently. A lot of them seem to have an internel dust problem. Is this a common failing with this lens
 
Interesting to note the dust problem. I usually use primes for video but thought it might be fun to try something new with a decent zoom lens on there
 
The 17-40 is a lovely lens which I use at every opportunity and doesn't disappoint in any way. Some say it loses it in the corners but I've not noticed that. Fabulous on a 5D2.

I also used the 17-55 before I went full frame, and again it's an amazing lens. I loved the controlled flare it would give and seemed pretty sharp all the way through. I had dust on mine but under expert guidance from Tobers took it apart and got it clean in 15 minutes. That said the dust doesn't affect IQ at all and is just an annoyance when you see it sitting inside the lens.

Either are great choices.
 
I still wouldn't suggest you buy the 17-40L for the crop - its a great lens but for a crop sensor there are more versatile options...

I've used it on FF and its great, but I find it too restricting on APS-C.
 
travellingcello said:
I still wouldn't suggest you buy the 17-40L for the crop - its a great lens but for a crop sensor there are more versatile options...

I've used it on FF and its great, but I find it too restricting on APS-C.
Click to expand...
Does that mean the 15-85 wins in the 17-40/15-85 tests you've been doing?
 
travellingcello said:
I still wouldn't suggest you buy the 17-40L for the crop - its a great lens but for a crop sensor there are more versatile options...

I've used it on FF and its great, but I find it too restricting on APS-C.
Click to expand...

I too was thinking of getting a 17-40L for my 450D. What would you suggest as an alternative? I want something wide for landscapes that would be an improvement on my 18-55IS.
 
Hi guys,

Thanks for all the input, I was looking at the Tokina 11-16 last night as i think the 10 would be just a bit too wide for me I know its only 1mm though. plus with the cash I save on the L I could get a timer for doing some time lapse :)
 
56BD said:
Hi guys,

Thanks for all the input, I was looking at the Tokina 11-16 last night as i think the 10 would be just a bit too wide for me I know its only 1mm though. plus with the cash I save on the L I could get a timer for doing some time lapse :)
Click to expand...

The canon 10-22mm goes to longer than the 11-16mm though. You don't have to shoot at it widest setting. If you're worried about the lens limiting you to being too wide, the 11-16 would be worse in that respect.
The reason to choose the tokina over the canon is the f/2.8 aperture if you need it for low light (maybe useful for video?) and I think it's probably a bit more solidly constructed than the canon.

The 10-22 has a FoV (almost exactly) equivalent to a 16-35mm on full frame, so it goes from very wide to moderately wide.
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
The canon 10-22mm goes to longer than the 11-16mm though. You don't have to shoot at it widest setting. If you're worried about the lens limiting you to being too wide, the 11-16 would be worse in that respect.
The reason to choose the tokina over the canon is the f/2.8 aperture if you need it for low light (maybe useful for video?) and I think it's probably a bit more solidly constructed than the canon.

The 10-22 has a FoV (almost exactly) equivalent to a 16-35mm on full frame, so it goes from very wide to moderately wide.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Yes should have mentioned that the 2.8 was drawing me to the 11-16 & video is always in the back of my mind but trying not to let it be the end choice, good point on the 10-22 going to make my choice tomorrow then look for the best deal

Thanks for all the input :)
 
vetonbike said:
I've been looking at second hand 17-55 f2.8 recently. A lot of them seem to have an internel dust problem. Is this a common failing with this lens
Click to expand...

It is common with this lens but the collection of dust can be mitigated somewhat by having a protection filter fitted.

Also worth bearing in mind that the dust will have zero real impact on images and if it really is a (cosmetic) concern then the front element is easily removed to clean it.
 
ChrisJ_SLH said:
It is common with this lens but the collection of dust can be mitigated somewhat by having a protection filter fitted.

Also worth bearing in mind that the dust will have zero real impact on images and if it really is a (cosmetic) concern then the front element is easily removed to clean it.
Click to expand...

...... protecting the front element will have no effect on preventing dust since it enters through the zoom mechanism..... putting on a filter prevents damage to the element itself.
 
travellingcello said:
...... protecting the front element will have no effect on preventing dust since it enters through the zoom mechanism..... putting on a filter prevents damage to the element itself.
Click to expand...

One theory with the 17-55 is that the dust enters (at least partially) around the front element, hence the filter thing.

I bought mine second hand and it had a couple of bits of dust pre-installed. I had a filter fitted constantly and when I came to sell it on I had no more than before.
 
futureal33 said:
Just out of curiosity, how sharp is the 17-40mm F4L on a 5D/5D2?
Could anyone post full frame and 100% crops up?
Click to expand...

I'll try and post up some shots later today. Mine is very sharp on full frame, well, sharp enough for me to think its on a par with my 70-200!
 
travellingcello said:
I still wouldn't suggest you buy the 17-40L for the crop - its a great lens but for a crop sensor there are more versatile options...

I've used it on FF and its great, but I find it too restricting on APS-C.
Click to expand...


And for a long time I listened to that advise and rule out ever buying a 17-40 for my 40d, BIG MISTAKE! My all time favourite walkkabout.


Not saying its the right lens for you, just saying don't be put off by other peoples opinion, if possible, borrow one for the day and make your own mind up.
 
wavefront said:
I'll try and post up some shots later today. Mine is very sharp on full frame, well, sharp enough for me to think its on a par with my 70-200!
Click to expand...

Could you post any non edited (non sharpened) shots up? And if possible, a 100% crop of the focus area to show sharpness?

Appreciate it :)

Thank you
 
Got my 17-40L yesterday, I had a 20-35 non L to try out for a while too. The L really isn't that much better than that apart from build which is far better, in fact I am going to send the L back and pick me up a 20-35, a bit different for me as it's full frame.
 
Last edited:
Okey dokey I am now in possession of a shiny new 17-40L & apart from being a few quid poorer ! Quite excited get it out & take some pics in anger (well my poor attempt of anger anyhow ) I stopped off in the park enroute home, will see if any of them are ok & post them up

Many thanks for all the input knew this would be the place to get some opinions in the pot

Cheers Baz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top