Canon ef 17-40 f4L or 24-70f4L Advice/Opinions Please

Messages
273
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
I've just bought a Canon 6d body,i was going to buy a 17-40 f4 as a walkaround lens,as i've previously owned one with a prev camera,but i've been thinking of the 24-70 f4,it'll mainly be used for landscape shots,i was just wanting to gauge opinion on what others thought,or experience of using one or both of these lenses
 
Messages
23,379
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#2
I've just bought a Canon 6d body,i was going to buy a 17-40 f4 as a walkaround lens,as i've previously owned one with a prev camera,but i've been thinking of the 24-70 f4,it'll mainly be used for landscape shots,i was just wanting to gauge opinion on what others thought,or experience of using one or both of these lenses
They’re very different lenses, designed for different uses.
I don’t see how they ‘compare’ or how anyone could make a recommendation for your use.
 

Canon Bob

Loves the Enemy
Messages
10,408
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
You'll need to decide if you're going to sacrifice the long end for extra width or the wide end for extra length but if the 17-40 is an option then you should be looking at the 16-35/4 IS.....a real peach of a lens.

Bob
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
Unless you are in dire need of a wide angle then personally I would not buy either of them as a walkaround lens.
Just get a 24-105 f4L.
 
Messages
767
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#5
I own both and as Phil V says they are different beasts. They both get a good deal of use but if I was to choose one as a walkaround general purpose lens then it would be the 24 - 70, I find that the 17 - 40 can be a touch too wide even at 40mm as a general purpose lens, unless you generally shoot sweeping landscapes then 24mm is generally wide enough on a FF body.

The 24 - 70 also has very good IS.

The 24 - 70 also has a close focus facility which occasionally comes in useful.

Downsides, you may find even 70mm a touch short at times and will hanker after the 24 - 105, but as the 24 - 70 is said to perform better optically (doubt you will see much difference in general use) you can always zoom the old fashioned way.
It is said that the 24 -70 at closer focusing distances suffers from RSA (to do with the design of the optics), i.e the focus distance changes as you stop the lens down, personally I have not had any problems in that regard.

I think your choice should be between the 24 - 70 and the 24 - 105...
 
Messages
1,735
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
I just retired my 17-40 in favour of a 16-35, for the benefit of IS.
I think, in general the 17-40 is a little wide for a general purpose "walk around" lens.
My preferred "walk around" is the 24-105, with the 16-35 if I need to go wider.
 
Messages
1,837
Name
Meeten
Edit My Images
No
#7
as a general walkabout lens get the 50/f1.8
Bang for buck you won't do much better.

As for landscapes, Id assume the wider 17-40 is more apt.
I had one, but not doing landscapes meant it sat in the bag more often than not, so I replaced it with a much older 28-70/f2.8 which suits my requirements that much more.

Edit to say these are all on a 6D as well.
 
Messages
21,028
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#9
For a while my most used lens on my 5D was a Sigma 12-24mm and that's a lot wider at one end and a lot shorter at the other than the Canon 17-40mm.

Just goes to show that one mans "That's way too wide man..." is another mans "Very nice thank you!" and after all a 35mm prime would be considered a very nice walk about by many and the 17-40mm obviously covers the 35mm FoV.
 
Messages
4,291
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
I have a 6D and use a 24-105 L as my walk about lens. I also have a 17-40 L, but as nice a lens as it is (particularly when stopped down to f8 and smaller), I use the 24-105 a lot more often. How much you will use a certain focal length will depend on the type of photography you want to do. Perhaps have a look at the XIF type details on some of your favourite photos and see what focal length you actually used. This will work on other people's photos on Flickr too if they've not turned off the details, so maybe have a look what focal length any photos you like on there have been taken on?

Also, you don't say whether you're planning to buy used or new. If you were thinking of new then maybe think about buying used instead? You could you perhaps get a mint-ish Mk 1 24-105 L IS (not all that different from the Mk 2 in terms of image quality) and a similar 17-40 L for about the same price as a new 24-70 f4? If so, I'd be tempted to buy the 24-105 from a long-established and reputable dealership/shop with as long a guarantee as you can find, that way if the aperture ribbon cable breaks (which can be an issue on some of these lenses) you should be covered for the guarantee period.

I hope my suggestions are useful and give you some options to consider. However, it's about deciding what is right for you, not me or anyone else who may give you some ideas/suggestions, so best of luck deciding. (y)
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
batemansxxxb
Messages
273
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
They’re very different lenses, designed for different uses.
I don’t see how they ‘compare’ or how anyone could make a recommendation for your use.
Well that wasn't a very helpful comment was it ! care to elaborate what the different uses are?

Unless you are in dire need of a wide angle then personally I would not buy either of them as a walkaround lens.
Just get a 24-105 f4L.
Thanks,i've also thought about that,but there are now mki & mkii versions,any significant improvements with the mk11 over the previous?
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
batemansxxxb
Messages
273
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
I have a 6D and use a 24-105 L as my walk about lens. I also have a 17-40 L, but as nice a lens as it is (particularly when stopped down to f8 and smaller), I use the 24-105 a lot more often. How much you will use a certain focal length will depend on the type of photography you want to do. Perhaps have a look at the XIF type details on some of your favourite photos and see what focal length you actually used. This will work on other people's photos on Flickr too if they've not turned off the details, so maybe have a look what focal length any photos you like on there have been taken on?

Also, you don't say whether you're planning to buy used or new. If you were thinking of new then maybe think about buying used instead? You could you perhaps get a mint-ish Mk 1 24-105 L IS (not all that different from the Mk 2 in terms of image quality) and a similar 17-40 L for about the same price as a new 24-70 f4? If so, I'd be tempted to buy the 24-105 from a long-established and reputable dealership/shop with as long a guarantee as you can find, that way if the aperture ribbon cable breaks (which can be an issue on some of these lenses) you should be covered for the guarantee period.

I hope my suggestions are useful and give you some options to consider. However, it's about deciding what is right for you, not me or anyone else who may give you some ideas/suggestions, so best of luck deciding. (y)
Very interesting comments about exif data,i've looked at a few of my photo's & a couple are 17 &18mm, but others are around 24 & 28mm,i'm planning to buy used, rather than new,as new prices are quite high,even the grey market has seen significant price increases just this week,there are some good used lenses on ebay,it's just trying to bag one at a good price
 
Messages
1,766
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#13

GTG

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,795
Edit My Images
Yes
#15
24-70 is walk around on FF but you can use anything you want. I try to use 70-200 for most stuff now because of the very high quality of those lenses and IQ. 70mm is actually not all that far from standard on FF and can be used for a lot of photos, especially if you take a few steps back
 
Messages
23,379
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#16
Well that wasn't a very helpful comment was it ! care to elaborate what the different uses are?


...
No, because I have no idea what uses you’d have for a wide angle lens or a std zoom, because I have no real idea what you like to shoot beyond ‘landscape’?

As you can see from the other answers above, we all have ‘different’ opinions on lenses, I’m really sorry you think someone else can tell you what to buy, but seriously the sooner you realise that they can’t, the better you’ll progress.

I use a wide angle zoom very rarely, and a std zoom slightly more often.

There was a time when my std zoom was used for 90% of my shots, I don’t shoot ‘landscapes’ but that was a typical wedding day.
 

User.82148

Suspended / Banned
Messages
858
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
I have a 17-40L and a 24-105L mark I. I enjoy both lenses but the longer lens gets much more use and if I go out with just one lens it is the the 24-105. But that's me, you may shoot more at the wide end.
 
Messages
1,528
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
It's a really difficult one. I spent my holiday last Summer with my 24-70 and got some fantastic images with it. We spent a fair bit of time wandering around French villages and down cobbled streets etc etc. I found on those occasions, that I yearned for something a bit wider as I was missing a few images due to being more cramped.

So, I bought a 16-35 to compliment the 24-70. I do still like the 70 end too though.

I guess, as others have said, if it's got to be just the one lens then you really have t think about the images you want to get, the places you visit and the style of photography that would most suit that lens.

Either that or get a 24-105 and then a wider lens and keep it in your pocket ;)
 
Messages
2,493
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#19
Ive never used the 17-40 so cant comment on it's quality from a personal view, but if i was looking at that lens for its range i would get the 16-35 f/4 IS (and did)

Looking at the 24-70 f/4IS, i can recommanded this lens as a good solid all rounder. I got mine for its smaller and lighter form factor, over my f/2.8mkii, plus the ability to do macro without needing another lens and shooting in low light with more DOF hand held. For me this makes it the perfect General/walkabout lens. Others wont agree though, and that's the thing (as said by many here), what works for one might not work for the next person.
Out of the 17-40 and 24-70 id go with the 24-70. Unless you need 17-23mm i see no reason to go for the 17-40, and 40mm is quite wide on a FF camera if its going to be used for general stuff.

IMO of course.

EDIT: Just seen a 24-70 f/4 in the classifieds on here. Very good price. If it were me id snap that up.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,283
Name
Ursula Cloybeam
Edit My Images
No
#20
I'm going to suggest the 24-105 also: such a versatile lens, even if not the fastest zoom available (f-stop wise). If I really need a wide aperture I'lI use a prime. But for general stuff it's hard to beat.
 

User.82148

Suspended / Banned
Messages
858
Edit My Images
Yes
#21
Ive never used the 17-40 so cant comment on it's quality from a personal view, but if i was looking at that lens for its range i would get the 16-35 f/4 IS (and did)

Looking at the 24-70 f/4IS, i can recommanded this lens as a good solid all rounder. I got mine for its smaller and lighter form factor, over my f/2.8mkii, plus the ability to do macro without needing another lens and shooting in low light with more DOF hand held. For me this makes it the perfect General/walkabout lens. Others wont agree though, and that's the thing (as said by many here), what works for one might not work for the next person.
Out of the 17-40 and 24-70 id go with the 24-70. Unless you need 17-23mm i see no reason to go for the 17-40, and 40mm is quite wide on a FF camera if its going to be used for general stuff.

IMO of course.

EDIT: Just seen a 24-70 f/4 in the classifieds on here. Very good price. If it were me id snap that up.
How do you find the IQ of the 24-70 f4is v the f2.8?
 
Messages
2,493
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#22
How do you find the IQ of the 24-70 f4is v the f2.8?
To my eye no different most of the time. I’ve had the f/2.8 for about 5 years, I’ve hardly used it for the past 6 months since getting my f/4. Obviously the f/2.8 is better, but its not noticeable a lot of the time unless you go looking for it.
 
Messages
14,341
Name
Nightmare
Edit My Images
No
#23
The first / main lens should be some sort of a 24-XX zoom. As mentioned there are different flavours with their own benefits and drawbacks. My 24-70mm (f/2.8 II) is certainly my most used landscape lens.

17-40 is pretty much an utter waste of money. It's very poor optically at the wide end which could be expected from a nearly 30 year old design. My advice would be to either purchase 16-35mm f/4 IS which is excellent or not buy one at all.
 
Messages
605
Name
Darryl
Edit My Images
No
#28
I know this is an opinion thread, but for me the 24-70 is more versatile. 24mm is pretty wide and the 70mm gives a little reach when you need it, with the standard 35mm and 50mm in between, there's a reason why it's such a popular lens.
 
Top