Do I need a 17-40?

J

jimigraham

Messages
19
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys,

After zero responses from my previous thread, I thought I'd recompose the question better.

I'll be off traveling in South America soon and need to sort my gear out.
I'm an amateur (there, I'll say it..) and will be shooting landscapes and general portraits, perhaps wildlife - depends what happens.

I currently have a 24-105 F4 and 70-200 F4 IS.

I know at 24mm the walkabout is a bit dodgy and don't want this to detract from my shots.

Is the 17-40 worth it?
 
Mostly landscapes your other thread said, I would say that really you would need a tripod and some filters, cpl and nd grads? I don't know what you currently photograph but would think 24 not wide enough.

Hard to say much more without knowing what you photograph

ps. what about renting a lens?
 
Last edited:
Three f4 lenses?

I'd stick with the 24-105 and add a fast prime.
 
Got a tripod in mind and will get a Hoya HD CPL (£90, great), probably an ND grad as well though never used one.

£500 on a lens that basically gives me 8mm of focal length (though sharper) seems hard to swallow. As woof woof says I could add a nifty fifty 1.4? Hmm
 
Are you going to be doing much low light shooting? Summer in Latin America doesn't sound likely to be dark and you always have the high iso option on a 5DII if you are indoors. You cannot make your lenses wider though...
 
Yes. Going to get one to complement my 12-24 and 24-105.
 
ianmarsh said:
Are you going to be doing much low light shooting? Summer in Latin America doesn't sound likely to be dark and you always have the high iso option on a 5DII if you are indoors. You cannot make your lenses wider though...
Click to expand...

Probably. It's semi winter down there in April when I'm going so dark evenings ahoy.

Hoya 77mm Pro-1 Digital ND8 Screw in Filter - is this a decent ND grad?
 
As an owner of a 17-40mm, I found it too restrictive on its own. I couldn't afford to have both so the 24-105 was more of a sensible choice for me. It was fun to use though, I must admit!

If money isn't an issue, I'd strive to own both, you already have the 24-105 so with this and the 17-40mm you'll have most of the crucial FLs covered for landscape. On a FF camera at 17mm, it's certainly quite interesting if you can get the composition right.

I'd buy one second hand. These lenses will always hold their value so if you find it's not for you just sell it on and you should make most, if not all of your money back.
 
Personally I would find the 17-40 more useful than a 24-105, when in buildings shooting interiors or wide ranging vistas with nice foregrounds it would really come in handy.

I've always thought a 17-40/4, 50/1.4 and 70-200/4 combo would be a nice travelling set with a 5d mk2 where you don't want a massively heavy bulky camera bag.
 
For your trip I'd definitely get one. Don't expect 17mm to be perfect, but 20mm+ should be very good. Don't worry about f4 * landscapes are shot stopped down and they save weight for travels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top