canon

Mr G

Mr G

Messages
2,399
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a canon 5d mk2 and I also have a 24-70 lens of which I love ;) I am into landscape photography as well as portraiture work ..canon seemed to be limited in wide angled L lenses is it worth the additional expense for a 17-40 ..would I get that much more out of this lens..I have looked at the 16-35 but for landscape work is it worth it for the 2.8 :|
 
Last edited:
17-40L. Superb super-wide. The 16-35L is only worth it if you need f/2.8. Apart from that, you could argue that the 17-40L is actually better, and certainly massively cheaper, but they are both top drawer :thumbs:
 
Used a 17-40 on a variety of bodies over the years - brilliant optic, build is fabulous and the price makes it an even better buy. God, I wish Nikon had this lens......
 
Another out and out 17-40L fan here. Agree pretty much word for word with Richard's summation tbh - Bought one 4-5 months ago, when my mate wanted his old 17-35 2.8L back, and love it to bits. It's a perfect landscape lens for me on my "old school" full frame camera (read EOS-3 35mm :)) and a superb, weatherproof (with a front filter fitted) walkabout on the 7D to boot :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top