Does anybody owns a CANON 17-40mm F/4L USM Lens?


Status
Not open for further replies.

pokoot

Deregistered
Sep 20, 2009
8
0
0
#1
Does anyone here in club snap owns a CANON 17-40mm F/4L USM Lens?

Any thoughts on this lens and can you compare it to the kit lens 18-55mm.

I currently own a 500d camera, do you think upgrading from kit lens to 17-40mm is worth it? Is there any marginal differences?

Are you generally happy with the output of your 17-40mm lens?

Cheers
 

PrimePhotog

Deregistered
Oct 25, 2007
1,736
0
0
www.flickr.com
#2
I would not recommend 17-40 for crop sensors like your 500D's.
Try getting the 17-55 f2.8 IS which is only a couple of hundred dollars more ex. Although it cannot be used on FF cameras, it has IS and f2.8. And the IQ is slightly better.

Most people get the 17-40 because they have or are going to get a full frame camera.
 

Dec 23, 2007
1,287
2
0
#3
If you are talking about 17-40 F4 USM vs your kit lens 18-55 then there is a major different. In term of build and IQ, 17-40 is far more superior that ur kit lens. 17-40 is the cheapest L lens canon dish up for user. But of course there is a limit compair to what primephotog's recommendation of 17-55 f2.8 IS. This is a very good lens with F2.8 and come with IS. Question back to you, do you shoot in a very low lighting conditio all the time? will you upgrade to FF next time? there are so many factor you have to consider before going for the next lens.

I will not speak for the rest but for me, i will chose something tat will allow me to advance into next stage rather then buy and then let go.
 

rendition

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2008
1,974
0
36
Singapore
www.VisualVerve.sg
#4
###### I owns it and I needs it for wide angle coverage. ######

I can't afford the 16-35 but more appropriately, I don't need f/2.8. You may/may not be able to see the difference in IQ as everyone has a different view/expectations on image quality but technically, you should see.

Are you generally happy with the output of your 17-40mm lens?
Apart from barrel distortion, yes.
 

PrimePhotog

Deregistered
Oct 25, 2007
1,736
0
0
www.flickr.com
#5
I will not speak for the rest but for me, i will chose something tat will allow me to advance into next stage rather then buy and then let go.
Personally, I would rather buy an excellent lens for use now rather than a WA with "so-so" features for use later. It's just my opinion. Yours may differ. :)
 

pokoot

Deregistered
Sep 20, 2009
8
0
0
#6
Thank you for all your replies.

Sorry guys, still quite new to all this photography. So I really don't know much on the technical side that you are talking about. The likes of FF Cameras ( Full Frame Cameras, I assume), Crop Sensor (same as cropping done in photoshop? ). Got to read some articles to cope up with your photography terms.

But a few more questions here to those people who have replied to this thread.

I really need a lens replacement on my 18-55 Kit lens. So basing on what you guys where suggesting was a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, but the way is see it is just more like of a kit lens (the look and feel). Money wise I cant afford to ditch a few more bucks on a 17-55 lens. I think the 17-40mm even cost that much already.

So my question are...

- What will I miss (features) if I mounted a 17-40mm on my 500D?
- Is it compatible to my 500D?

Ps. Can explain to me more in layman's term on what is the difference on a crop sensor cameras and full frame cameras.


-----
blog.pokoot.com
 

zhuangzhou

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
73
0
0
Singapore
#7
The crop sensor camera has a smaller imaging sensor compared to full-frame cameras (36 x 24 mm). The implication for a crop sensor camera is a smaller mirror, which permits the use of EF-S lens (short back-focus). Hence, if you purchased the EF-S 17-55 F/2.8IS USM, that lens would be fully compatible with your 500D, but not with cameras like 5D, 1D etc. On the other hand, EF 17-40 F4L USM is compatible with all Canon Digital EOS bodies.

Your question appears to pertain to image quality chiefly. Indeed, the EF 17-40 F4L USM offers a much better image quality compared to EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 IS, especially in the corners and in terms of the colour output. However, what you would definitely realise is that the EF 17-40 F4L has a shorter range than the EF-S 18-55, and hence perhaps a limitation to your craft and art. There are people who like the EF 17-40 F4L over the kit lens, primarily because of the output and that they could live with the range. L lens do offer much more than just image quality; they have better ergonomics, weather-sealing, full-time manual focus and a much faster focus due to its Ring USM design. However, given the aperture of the lens and its range, I doubt you could get more in terms of creative opportunities, where you want greater depth of field or the ability to shoot under low-light conditions or what.

In short, I don't think the difference between EF 17-40 F4L and EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 is any significant, unless you are really, really craving for better image quality (print anything?). You might as well get a EF 24-105 F4L IS USM (albeit you will lose some wide-angle) and gain greater range, IS and a more versatile lens. (versatility is subjective depending on shooting style)

And since you said you are new to photography, it might (I think) be too early for you to invest in such expensive lens. Perhaps a EF 50 mm F/1.8 ($130 at most) which is unbeatable with regards to its image quality: cost ratio? The huge aperture and small size definitely helps.

Just my 2 cents.
 

Last edited:

PrimePhotog

Deregistered
Oct 25, 2007
1,736
0
0
www.flickr.com
#8
Thank you for all your replies.

Sorry guys, still quite new to all this photography. So I really don't know much on the technical side that you are talking about. The likes of FF Cameras ( Full Frame Cameras, I assume), Crop Sensor (same as cropping done in photoshop? ). Got to read some articles to cope up with your photography terms.

But a few more questions here to those people who have replied to this thread.

I really need a lens replacement on my 18-55 Kit lens. So basing on what you guys where suggesting was a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, but the way is see it is just more like of a kit lens (the look and feel). Money wise I cant afford to ditch a few more bucks on a 17-55 lens. I think the 17-40mm even cost that much already.

So my question are...

- What will I miss (features) if I mounted a 17-40mm on my 500D?
- Is it compatible to my 500D?

Ps. Can explain to me more in layman's term on what is the difference on a crop sensor cameras and full frame cameras.


-----
blog.pokoot.com
Reply With Quote
If you can't find a reason to upgrade, then I don't suggest you do. And of course if you still can't tell the difference between two lenses, you probably don't need the better one IMHO.
 

bblurrr

New Member
Sep 11, 2007
923
0
0
interestingby.isaias.com.mx
#9
Thank you for all your replies.

Sorry guys, still quite new to all this photography. So I really don't know much on the technical side that you are talking about. The likes of FF Cameras ( Full Frame Cameras, I assume), Crop Sensor (same as cropping done in photoshop? ). Got to read some articles to cope up with your photography terms.

But a few more questions here to those people who have replied to this thread.

I really need a lens replacement on my 18-55 Kit lens. So basing on what you guys where suggesting was a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, but the way is see it is just more like of a kit lens (the look and feel). Money wise I cant afford to ditch a few more bucks on a 17-55 lens. I think the 17-40mm even cost that much already.

So my question are...

- What will I miss (features) if I mounted a 17-40mm on my 500D?
- Is it compatible to my 500D?

Ps. Can explain to me more in layman's term on what is the difference on a crop sensor cameras and full frame cameras.


-----
blog.pokoot.com

borrow from someone you know or rent the lens for a day... I think it will cost you between $20 to $30... then decide if want to buy it.

that was what I did... while the lens (17-40mm) is good, after using it for 2 days I realize it is not what I wanted. I went for 17-85 instead (this was about 2.5 year back). IQ not as good as the 17-40 but it gave me enough distance as a walkabout lens...
I have since given up my 400D and 17-85 to my wife and I am using 50D with tamron 17-50 f2.8 and loving it.


FF or Crop... you should google it... anyway you can read them here http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm and here http://www.ophrysphotography.co.uk/pages/tutorialfullframecrop2.htm
 

ardnirun

New Member
Sep 22, 2008
553
0
0
Serangoon
#10
I love the 17-40...one of my favourite lenses..uhm..i think it is my favourite lens...
the build...quite solid for something "affordable" if you compare with the 16-35..

its definitely a level higher than the 18-55....

hardly leaves my 20d...it is trully worth the money...IQ pretty ok to me...

17-55 okla...constant f2.8...got alot of 17-55 fanboys here also...pretty sharp and all...

the 17-40 to me...is excellent..pretty flexible..contrasty...

know your use first..and with the 17-40...saves the hassle if u wanna go for full frame in the future...

if u dun wanna..i gez the 17-55 or tammy 17-50 is good enuff..if not very good...
 

Last edited:
Dec 26, 2006
283
0
16
#11
I'm a very happy owner of 17-40 F4L! I've used 18-55 IS previously and found that the image quality is disappointing. After upgrading to 17-40L, the image contrast & sharpness are great.

Just get it and I'm sure it'll last you for at least the next 10 years given the built quality. Save the hassle to upgrade when getting FF. I certainly believe FF cam prices will drop significantly after 3-5 years. By then, most people who're serious into photography will go FF. Moreover, EF lens especially the L series will certainly retain the value much better than EF-S.
 

antty

New Member
Jan 18, 2009
51
0
0
#12
I am using this lens on 500D.

Shot with 17-40mm. Thats Jonathan Draken413o.
 

Last edited:

pokoot

Deregistered
Sep 20, 2009
8
0
0
#13
@antty
Do you mind sharing your pictures taken by your 17-40mm?

@Jookee
I like your thoughts of economics. L lenses will retain their value.
Do you have Any sample pictures? a link perhaps.

@zhuangzhou
I own a 50mm 1.8 already. I just want to upgrade my 18-55mm lens coz im quite disappointed with blurriness of my image.
see my flickr account at www.flickr.com/pokoot
 

Aug 14, 2008
170
0
0
Sembawang
#14
:D I used to own a 17 -40mm. sold it and got myself a 17-55f2.8 for my 50D. No regrets.:thumbsup:
 

antty

New Member
Jan 18, 2009
51
0
0
#15
 

Last edited:

antty

New Member
Jan 18, 2009
51
0
0
#16
Shutter: 1/160
Aperture: F/5.6
Focal Length: 40mm
ISO: 100



No regret with this lens.
 

Last edited:

calebk

Senior Member
Jul 25, 2006
10,594
0
0
Clementi
#17
As with all threads on lenses, you will find users who say that they enjoy using the lens, and users who recommend you other lenses, and even users who say you should stick with what you have. It's all very subjective because this is a gathering of people with different styles and opinions.

I would agree with the third group, though, and stick with what you have. It all boils down to needs, and it is apparent you don't quite know whether you need this lens or not. Granted, it's a nice lens to have. So are at least 5 other lenses in the EF lens line up. You need to know what you need to determine a purchase. Since you don't know what you need yet, continue shooting with what you have until you outgrow your equipment.
 

Dec 26, 2006
283
0
16
#18
@antty
Do you mind sharing your pictures taken by your 17-40mm?

@Jookee
I like your thoughts of economics. L lenses will retain their value.
Do you have Any sample pictures? a link perhaps.

@zhuangzhou
I own a 50mm 1.8 already. I just want to upgrade my 18-55mm lens coz im quite disappointed with blurriness of my image.
see my flickr account at www.flickr.com/pokoot
Sample from my 17-40L:







 

satch

Senior Member
May 1, 2004
2,114
0
0
Living out of the suitcase...
#19
used to own the 17-40 lens, and used it on 1d (Mk 1) to cover indoor events, parties, as well as general photography. afterwhich i switched to the tammy 17-50 f2.8 for a brief period of time.. that's where i find the limitations of the 17-40 in low-light situations.. with the tammy 17-50, i can go w/o flash for indoor shoots.
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#20
at web size, you aren't going to see much difference, so i'm not sure why posting up pictures is going to help you make a decision.

17-40 L is a full frame lens, it is going to be sharper at 100%. but whether you need that sharpness, is another thing. are you sure you want 17-40? do you need something wider, are you going to go for full frame camera eventually in the long run.. these are things you need to think about.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom