Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    opp. East Coast Park
    Posts
    1,124

    Default If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    If you have a 17-40mm lens and want to get one more lens for a trip... and can only afford either 10-22mm or 70-200 f4L, which lens would you get?
    In other words, between ultra-wide zoom and tele zoom for a trip, which one would you choose?
    The best photographer is one who is inspired by the innate nature of his subjects.

  2. #2
    Member tainted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    in Critterdom
    Posts
    459

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    i'd go for the 70-200 F4L

  3. #3
    Member adrianongs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    243

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    70-200mm too. cause you already have the 17-40mm, although it isn't wide enough.
    Canon EOS 5D Mark II | EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM | Speedlite 580EX II
    a student.

  4. #4

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    go for 70-200 since you have 17-40 and you dont need the 10-22 cause both are wide angle lens.

  5. #5
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Depends on where I'm going.... and what I like to shoot on this trip.

    Example -

    Counties with open landscape and big mountain range - I would get an Ultra Wide.

    My 2-Cents Worth.....

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  6. #6
    Moderator diver-hloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Somewhere North
    Posts
    5,201

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by doubleace View Post
    go for 70-200 since you have 17-40 and you dont need the 10-22 cause both are wide angle lens.
    Hahaha.... that would depends on TS having a Crop Factor or Full Frame Camera....

    17-40mm x 1.6 = 27-64mm

    10-22mm x 1.6 = 16-35mm

    27mm compare to 16mm..... there is a big difference

    Scuba & Father... For Life

  7. #7

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by diver-hloc View Post
    Depends on where I'm going.... and what I like to shoot on this trip.

    Example -

    Counties with open landscape and big mountain range - I would get an Ultra Wide.

    My 2-Cents Worth.....
    That's very true. I have a Tamron 17-50 and I brought along my 70-200 along for a trip (nearly 3 weeks) last year too. But turned out, I barely used the 70-200 for more than 10% or my shots!

    If you're using crop, think a travel combo would comprise of 2-3 lenses, depending on needs and location in question.

    Ultrawide: 10-22 or 12-24
    Walkabout: 17-40, 17-50, 17-85
    Tele: 55-250, 70-200, 70-300

    Or if you want to travel light : 10-22, 35, 85 with a 1.4x or 2x tele convertor.

    For FF, likewise depends on what you want to do:
    Ultrawide: Sigma 12-24, 16-35, 17-40
    Walkabout: 24-70, 24-105
    Tele: 70-200, 70-300

    Or a light combo: Sigma 12-24, 50, 100mm with a 1.4x or 2x tele convertor. Or substitute the 50 and 100mm for a 24-105mm and bring along the 1.4x Tele convertor.

    Just some suggestions.
    Last edited by KangS; 12th August 2008 at 09:53 PM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    I've never used my 70-200 on my trip so far, probably because I don't bring it out.
    Actually, I used it to shoot a balloon from the balcony, but that's it.
    I would have left it back home if my friends would have borrowed it, but nobody wanted it, so I brought it with me.

    Ultrawide would get a lot more use than the tele!
    It is the camera, not the photographer.
    my flickr - adamloh.com

  9. #9

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    No need to buy 10-22 or 70-200, just bring 17-40 enough.
    It is the camera, not the photographer.
    my flickr - adamloh.com

  10. #10

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    all you need is 17-40, anything too wide, shoot in paranoma. maybe bring a 50 1.8 for low light portraits, or better still a flash. thats all you need! at least for me.

  11. #11

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    bring the 17-40. Stitch your shots. Save money.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    10,596

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by adamadam View Post
    No need to buy 10-22 or 70-200, just bring 17-40 enough.
    Cos you-know-who says so.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    opp. East Coast Park
    Posts
    1,124

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by diver-hloc View Post
    Hahaha.... that would depends on TS having a Crop Factor or Full Frame Camera....

    17-40mm x 1.6 = 27-64mm

    10-22mm x 1.6 = 16-35mm

    27mm compare to 16mm..... there is a big difference
    Crop factor la... If full frame, 17-40 would be wide enough already.
    Yahhh... big difference... that's why thinking to get it...

    Quote Originally Posted by adamadam View Post
    I've never used my 70-200 on my trip so far, probably because I don't bring it out.
    Actually, I used it to shoot a balloon from the balcony, but that's it.
    I would have left it back home if my friends would have borrowed it, but nobody wanted it, so I brought it with me.

    Ultrawide would get a lot more use than the tele!
    You never ask me mah... would be more than willing to borrow it... hehe...

    Quote Originally Posted by adamadam View Post
    No need to buy 10-22 or 70-200, just bring 17-40 enough.
    I've used this lens for coming to 2 years already... that's why I know it is not wide enough!

    Seems like it's better for me to get 10-22 for a trip...
    The best photographer is one who is inspired by the innate nature of his subjects.

  14. #14

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Ok
    Then yes 10-22 hoho
    A few weeks ago I went on a trip, mostly used 17-85 and 12-24. hee haw
    It is the camera, not the photographer.
    my flickr - adamloh.com

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    opp. East Coast Park
    Posts
    1,124

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by adamadam View Post
    Ok
    Then yes 10-22 hoho
    A few weeks ago I went on a trip, mostly used 17-85 and 12-24. hee haw
    Is 12-24 wide enough?
    Was thinking if I wanna get an ultra-wide, might as well get the widest I can find... since I already have 17-40... have already covered from 17mm onwards.
    The best photographer is one who is inspired by the innate nature of his subjects.

  16. #16

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by WuffRuff View Post
    Is 12-24 wide enough?
    Was thinking if I wanna get an ultra-wide, might as well get the widest I can find... since I already have 17-40... have already covered from 17mm onwards.
    12-24 is wide enough, but if you want to go wider, then 10-22

    or a Sigma 12-24 on full frame yeh? more gear hoho
    It is the camera, not the photographer.
    my flickr - adamloh.com

  17. #17

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Same ol answer I'll give - it all depends on what and how you shoot.

    On a 1.6x crop, your 17-40 is like a standard zoom. It's NOT a wide zoom, and definitely not an ultra wide.

    If you're traveling in a lot of open plains and vistas and you'll be looking at the ranges from kilometres away, and you like sniping and taking lots of close-ups and portraits, then I would say 1740 & 70200, but if your travels include a lot of temples, urban or built areas and architecture, and you tend to always find that your 1740 is 'just not wide enuff', then I would definitely say 1022 & 1740 and perhaps borrow a 50mm.

    I've used the 1022 on assignments before and it's a top-notch performer. While I have no issues with 3rd parties, I would just spend that little bit more and get the 1022. It's really really worth that few extra hundred bucks for the consistency and peace of mind.

    If I were to get a 70200, assuming from your size and built and that you won't be using a tripod most of the time, I would definitely save for the f/4 IS version. The extra you spend would be more than made up for in terms of keeper shots that do not have handshake, and the joy and satisfaction you'll get from using the lens.

    Good luck in your search and enjoy your trip ... to where ever.
    Last edited by Dream Merchant; 13th August 2008 at 08:15 AM.

  18. #18
    Member MarkTan89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Boon Keng
    Posts
    591

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Depends on where you're going I feel. If you're going to those European countries with breathtaking landscapes then the 10-22mm would be a better choice or if you wish to take other things besides landscape then the 70-200f/4L would be better.

  19. #19
    Member emlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ang Mo Kio
    Posts
    1,761

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    It looks to me as if your default of 17-40mm is because it is a L lens. drop that idea. your truely useful focal range should be 10-22mm and 70-200mm.

    stop thinking L lens, think you and your environment. i've seen people using non L but produces great pictures.

  20. #20

    Default Re: If you have a 17-40mm and can only buy 1 lens for a trip, ultra-wide or tele?

    Quote Originally Posted by emlee View Post
    It looks to me as if your default of 17-40mm is because it is a L lens. drop that idea. your truely useful focal range should be 10-22mm and 70-200mm.

    stop thinking L lens, think you and your environment. i've seen people using non L but produces great pictures.
    You're suggesting sell the 1740, and get the 1022/70200 combo?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •