Which landscape lens for 40D? [EDIT ...and a bit of general purpose]

[dakid]

Hiya,

This is in furtherance to my other more general topic about full kit, I had to start thinking more about which lens to get.

I had started out by deciding that the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 was a good lens for the money, but a lot of people were recommending the Canon EF 17-40 f4. I've also noticed that the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS is nowhere near as expensive as I'd thought, so I'm now half-considering that too (just means another month's saving!!).

So ... out of the below ... which would you pick? I know the Tamron is a good lens, and its price is certainly a strong factor, but how much better are the other two?

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM @ £689
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM @ £539
Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF @ £259

Prices are from Park Cameras and are meant to be indicative of pricing rather than necessarily the cheapest.

Thanks in advance

DaKid

[EDIT] I realise that actual requirements are a good landscape lens with the ability to do a little bit of general purpose work as well

 

[StewartR]

You don't need IS for landscapes. You don't need f/2.8 for landscapes.

The Canon 17-40 has a stellar reputation, and it will still be useable if you ever decide to upgrade to full-frame or a 1D series camera. (And that means it should hold its value very well if you ever decide to sell it.)

 

[kingborris]

i think i'm going for the 17-55 IS when i get my 40D. Kerso is doing a good price on this lens, and with the cashback @ £40 on this lens, its the one to go for IMO

 

[dakid]

You don't need IS for landscapes. You don't need f/2.8 for landscapes.

The Canon 17-40 has a stellar reputation, and it will still be useable if you ever decide to upgrade to full-frame or a 1D series camera. (And that means it should hold its value very well if you ever decide to sell it.)

I agree with what you're saying, but this will be my only lens for the immediate future and I do want to do some amount of general purpose photography with it (i.e. a bit of macro, a bit of portrait, a bit of street photography), and that aperture and the IS will make a difference to that.

I suppose that that means I've not really asked the right question in the topic :bonk:, but you did answer the question in the topic, so thank you!