Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Canon

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Yew Tee
    Posts
    677

    Default Canon

    Hi all, Im think of buying a 17-XXmm lens and after narrowing down to tamron 17-50mm, canon 17-40mmL and 17-55mm IS USM .. i wanted the 17-55mm but it's much more expensive and also not L when compared to 17-40mmL .. I know what i want to shoot just that i canot get over the L part ..
    If the photo i took is 1% unclear, I will rather delete .. www.flickr.com/photos/59837685@N03/

  2. #2

    Default Re: Canon

    I'd not recommend looking for the 'L' for 'L's sake. Look at what the lens can give you in terms of utility, size/weight, performance.
    You can use this site as a reference
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R....aspx?Lens=404

    17-40mm will never be at 50mm focal length when you need it. 'L' lenses only represent good build quality, not superior optics.

  3. #3
    Moderator rhino123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NA
    Posts
    5,247

    Default Re: Canon

    Seeing that you include both 17-50 and 17-55, I gather that you are using an APS-C camera? to me the 17-40mmL was only useful if you want to upgrade to FF in near future because both 17-50 and 17-55 cannot be use on a FF camera. Having say that, u might wish to also check out the 15-85mm (although this lens do not have fix aperture) but there are some fabulous review on it. As to image quality - I would believe that 17-55 would be better as compare to the 17-40mm but there are some issue with the 17-55mm's IS motor, so you might want to be careful.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Canon

    If possible, get your hands on these lenses and try it for yourself. if not possible to lend from friends, maybe can try renting, or can visit friendly camera shops to try.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Yew Tee
    Posts
    677

    Default Re: Canon

    I alr got the 70-300mmL so not likely to get 15-85mm ..
    If the photo i took is 1% unclear, I will rather delete .. www.flickr.com/photos/59837685@N03/

  6. #6
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Canon

    People are so hung up about branded stuff nowadays... L, LV, Kate Spade....

    Use what makes most sense for you. Not what you think makes others think about you. If F2.8 is what you are looking for, having a red band around your lens cannot magically make your aperture wider.

    You can try this, get the tamron, and paint the gold ring red. Or, tie a red rubberband on the 17-55 IS.
    Last edited by daredevil123; 8th May 2011 at 10:15 AM.

  7. #7
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Canon

    Quote Originally Posted by rhino123 View Post
    Seeing that you include both 17-50 and 17-55, I gather that you are using an APS-C camera? to me the 17-40mmL was only useful if you want to upgrade to FF in near future because both 17-50 and 17-55 cannot be use on a FF camera. Having say that, u might wish to also check out the 15-85mm (although this lens do not have fix aperture) but there are some fabulous review on it. As to image quality - I would believe that 17-55 would be better as compare to the 17-40mm but there are some issue with the 17-55mm's IS motor, so you might want to be careful.
    Even then, many people on upgrading to FF, will replace their 17-40 with 16-35m2 in the end.
    Last edited by daredevil123; 8th May 2011 at 10:16 AM.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Canon

    Not all "L" lenses are good...
    Alpha

  9. #9

    Default Re: Canon

    "L" lenses are just a branding/marketing strategy. While most of them are good, there are other Canon and 3rd party lenses that are on par in terms of image quality

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Yew Tee
    Posts
    677

    Default Re: Canon

    ok thx all, i will be getting the 17-55mm IS USM guess i shall be sticking with crop body for a long long time =D 60D -> 70D -> 80D -> 90D -> 99.9D ..
    If the photo i took is 1% unclear, I will rather delete .. www.flickr.com/photos/59837685@N03/

  11. #11

    Default Re: Canon

    if your body can handle 1600 ISO with clean or minimal noise shots, then go with the 17-40 and opt for a flash. otherwise, the 17-55, but imo- it feels kinda ... cheap ... compared to the 17-40 but hey, f2.8 haha gluck with the decision bro
    canon fan boy ;D

  12. #12

    Default Re: Canon

    To save money, just go for Tamron 17-50 non VC. Won't go wrong.
    For the best option (on EFS), go for 17-55 IS.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,786

    Default Re: Canon

    I agree with Shen Siung. Not too sure abt canon mount, the nikon mount version Tamron 17-50mm non VC is good.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Yew Tee
    Posts
    677

    Default Re: Canon

    Now you guys pycho me to get tamron 17-50mm non VC, now abit sway by my own decision ..
    If the photo i took is 1% unclear, I will rather delete .. www.flickr.com/photos/59837685@N03/

  15. #15
    Member Radiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    239

    Default Re: Canon

    Buy the canon 17-55mm IS if money not an issue. It cost more for than 17-50 non VC and 17-40mm for very good reasons. If not, nobody will buy it.
    Canon User

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
  •