Canon 17-40mm L or Canon 20mm f2.8 Prime?

captures.in.time

captures.in.time

Messages
1,764
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All

I finally have saved some cash to buy another lens and this time I want one which will become my landscape lens. Not been on here for ages!!!

I currently have an EOS 5 Mk1 which I love combined with a 24-105mm L series and the 50mm f1.4 Prime.

I am considering either the 17-40mm L series or the 20mm f2.8 Prime.

My thoughts on both are as follows...

The 20mm... I like primes... I like the simplicity and I like the fact they make you work... my 24-105mm is already great for landscapes... sort of walkabout ones... but this would be my big shot lens... If it was too wide at times I could crop... or even just pop back on the 24-105mm. But I have never heard much about the 20mm prime... or anyones thoughts on it! Also I once had a 15-30mm on a film camera and found the results at the 15-20mm range a bit wackey!

The 17 - 40mm... This would suit me as a great walkabout landscaping lens... The build quality will be amazing... its got a 77mm filter thread so my poleriser and 10 stop would fit... I realise the limitations of my EOS5d mk1 for wildlife and bird photography which i'd like to do more of... so the plan would be to get a crop sensor body... so this would become a great standard zoom for the future... but then thats a long time off in reality the way life and other money pressures are... Also I have said I found the 15-20mm range a bit whackey for me in the past... and er my 24-105mm already covers the 24-40 range!

I feel I am talking myself into the 20mm prime at the mo... Is this the thing to do?!?!?

Any thoughts would be helpful!
 
Hi Mark
You asked the same question about a year ago almost to the day and about four times since ! Did the previous reply's not help ?
In one of the threads you said the zoom looked to be better than the prime and judging by the lack of response from anybody owning the prime you came to the same conclusion.
If you are still in doubt why not hire one or both and decide.
 
Last edited:
I Know I Know I know... I know I did... and I maybe should have reposted rather than starting a new thread... but I'm still confussed now as I ever was on what to do with this dilema.

Hiring one is an idea right enough... but I dont even have a clue how much that would cost ... I'll maybe have a look... but money is tight and i'd rather just make a decission than pay money to a hire firm... Im thinking a hire would be at least £40!

Soo I just thought i'd post again and see if there where any new opinions!?!?!

If so please let me know... Other peoples thoughts do help a lot.

Mark
 
I use the 5D MKI with 17-40 and love it. Some barel distortion at the 17mm end but you'd expect that anyway and if you are using lightroom 3 if removes most of it.

Never used the 20mm F2.8 but i did consider it before I bought my 17-40 but I decided that it'll suit me more to have the zoom
 
If it were for landscapes primarily then I'd go for the 17-40 f4L as the fact it will (hopefully) sit on a tripod most of it's working life you won't be using it at f4 but f8-f16.

THEN... i would save up for a prime for low light walkabout general type stuff.

I have a 24-105 f4L and have just bought a Canon 10-22 f3.5 but I feel I will need/want a wide prime with large aperture so I'm saving for a 24mm f1.8 or similar.

Quote from The digital Picture.com

"In conclusion, I recommend not buying the Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX DG Lens. Sorry Sigma, this one is a dud. If you want a fast 20mm lens, I suggest saving for the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM Lens. It far surpasses the performance of the current Sigma and Canon 20mm lenses in all regards. If you want a good 20mm lens but do not need a fast aperture, the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM Lens is a great choice. "
 
Last edited:
Ho Hum. More Sigma bashing...

I mostly use primes and I can't see myself ever going for the 17-40mm. It seems to get mixed reviews and many mention distortion and vignetting and then there's the uninspiring spec. But maybe being an L saves it from obscurity. The Canon 20mm f2.8 seems to get mixed to poor review and I decided to go for the Sigma 20mm f1.8. Mines a bit soft at f1.8 but very sharp soon after. All in all a fantastic lens. Sorry Canon but Siggy every time in this company.
 
Last edited:
Hi mark
I know the adverts do change but at the top of this page an Ad for LensPimp:
17-40mm £32 odd for 7 days possibly plus Vat also Lens for Hire advertise here, again 17-40mm £39 inc Vat for 7 days.
At least doing it that way you can be sure in your own mind if you are making the right decision. Must admit I am biased using the 17 -40mm myself !
Going by the few replies you have had about a fixed W/A lens except possibly 24mm F1.8 I think. I would assume from 26500 members not a lot use them.
C
 
The Canon 20mm f2.8 seems to get mixed to poor review
Click to expand...

Ho Hum. More Canon bashing... :lol::lol::lol:

Sorry couldn't resist!!

I have seen reviews and many samples of the Sigma 24mm f1.8 and it looks a stunning lens, probably the one I'm going to go for.
 
"Ho Hum. More Canon bashing... "

I know it's one of my pet subjects but I honestly don't know what's going on with Sigma on the internet. If you believe half of what you read Sigma would I'm sure have gone bust years ago. Personally I think it's a mixture of genuine faults, internet rumour, third hand Chinese whispers, badge snobbery and people not not knowing what they're doing. I suppose Canon suffer from this too, look at the panic surrounding 7D focus issues and people taking multiple copies back...
 
woof woof said:
"Ho Hum. More Canon bashing... "

I know it's one of my pet subjects but I honestly don't know what's going on with Sigma on the internet. If you believe half of what you read Sigma would I'm sure have gone bust years ago. Personally I think it's a mixture of genuine faults, internet rumour, third hand Chinese whispers, badge snobbery and people not not knowing what they're doing. I suppose Canon suffer from this too, look at the panic surrounding 7D focus issues and people taking multiple copies back...
Click to expand...

You're not wrong! The internet can be very harmful with peoples opinions etc.

I love Sigma. The good models really are exceptional and I'm not talking about just the expensive EX models. My 1st lens was a 17-70 f2.8-4.5 non OS and looking back at old images I think it was one of the best lenses I owned. Super sharp and nice contrast/colour.
 
Ceejay said:
Hi Mark
You asked the same question about a year ago almost to the day and about four times since ! Did the previous reply's not help ?
In one of the threads you said the zoom looked to be better than the prime and judging by the lack of response from anybody owning the prime you came to the same conclusion.
If you are still in doubt why not hire one or both and decide.
Click to expand...

hawk eye
i wish my memory was as good LOL
 
OK slept on it and still drawn to the 20mm... If I used a step up ring so my 77mm filters would work on this 72mm thread... would I get issues?

Also anyone got any final opinions... should I reconsider and rethink about the 17-40mm

M
 
Or you could save up for the Carl Zeiss 21mm f2.8 Distagon manual focus lens at £1300
OK it's expensive but WOW! What a great lens, blows all others out the water!
 
^Now you are being just silly!

Been thinking a little at my desk... meant to be working... maybe it would be sensible to go for the 17-40mm... but often I dont do sensible!

And despite everyones comments... I am drawn to the 20mm prime... and I think its on some naustalgic (sp?) whim... rather than sensible thought... but then sometimes it's right to follow whims rather than sensible thought... after all what man would be married if we followed sensible thoughts!!! LOL
 
It's a prime.... It's simple and uncomplicated... my 24-105mm is a fab landscape lens... I have had a 15-30mm lens before and found the distortion from 15-20mm a bit much and whacky results... I like the idea of having the 20mm prime that goes on for that big landscape shot... and if to wide I can crop... otherwise the 24-105mm is fine! I'm not an L glass snob... I kinda feel it gives me something I dont want and i'll take it and the 24-105mm out and spend my life swapping lenses on those walkabout discovering a place days.... im sounding more convinced than ever the 20mm prime is the right choice... so is the sigma one worth thinking about???

M
 
marky.b said:
hawk eye
i wish my memory was as good LOL
Click to expand...

Not really, just use the fifth tab from the right at the top of the page

(SEARCH)

I suppose because this forum uses a standard forum page set-up I am used to it. Another forum I am on (not photography) uses the same and I have to use the search facility a lot on that one.
C
 
markelliot said:
It's a prime.... It's simple and uncomplicated... my 24-105mm is a fab landscape lens... I have had a 15-30mm lens before and found the distortion from 15-20mm a bit much and whacky results... I like the idea of having the 20mm prime that goes on for that big landscape shot... and if to wide I can crop... otherwise the 24-105mm is fine! I'm not an L glass snob... I kinda feel it gives me something I dont want and i'll take it and the 24-105mm out and spend my life swapping lenses on those walkabout discovering a place days.... im sounding more convinced than ever the 20mm prime is the right choice... so is the sigma one worth thinking about???

M
Click to expand...
Not used the sigma or even looked at any reviews so cant comment there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top