Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Canon 17-40mm L Lens for 20D

Discussion

6 replies
Posted by Frank Winters on September 28, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Hi folks,

I have made up my mind -- thanks to all those who made recommendations.

I'm going to upgrade my 17-85mm EFS lens to a Canon 17-40mm L one.

My rationale includes the fact that this will be my normal as well as semi-wide lens for Landscapes.

Near as I can tell its a bargin at the price of ~ $675 new and produces images of excellent quailty. It will work with my dreamed of 5D or other full frame camera as well.

I think the EFS 10-22mm lens would be fun but not as flexible as the 17-40 and probably slightly lower image quailty. I like to shoot in the range of the 17-40 on my camera -- ~ 27- 64mm -- perfect for me. I really like the 28-35mm range for landscapes as well as city shooting.

Comments?

Thanks,
Frank

Posted by Mel Ladewig on September 28, 2007 at 11:41 AM
I'm sure you'll be happy with the 17-40L. There is a reason why it has not been removed from my kit despite the fact that I also own a 10-22 and a Tokina 28-70 f2.8. In fact, more often than not, the two lenses I take when hiking are the 10-22 and 17-40 regardless of the focal length overlap.

A recent 17-40L shot

Its a great performer on a 1.6 crop system.

Mel-
Posted by Thomas Biggs on September 28, 2007 at 2:53 PM
I also carry both the 10-22 and 17-40 and happy with both and they both go with me everywhere :biggrin:
Posted by Steve Foss on September 28, 2007 at 10:26 PM
The 17-40L is my go-to wide angle lens for crop cameras, which are what I shoot most of the time. It is sweet. On full-frame bodies, corners/edges tend to be a little soft when shot at 17mm, but bump it to 19 or 20mm and that goes away, and the problem does not manifest itself on the 1.3 or 1.6 crop bodies, as far as my own experience has shown. The 17-40L is one of the two lenses I shoot the most, and I am not a landscape guy by trade.
Posted by Ed Cordes on October 1, 2007 at 9:43 PM
I like my 17-40 L a lot. I use it on a 1.3 crop camera. Only thing you have to watch for is barrel distortion of horizons and inward tilting of upper areas of vertical straight lines at the edges. If you are careful with composition these issues are not noticeable.
Posted by Michael Pancier on October 24, 2007 at 10:53 AM
My 17-40L worked great in the SW when you're shooting canyons and mountain ranges; but it will give a lot of barrell distortion most notable with straight horizons....my only beef with the lens...
Posted by Buck Ward on October 24, 2007 at 6:47 PM
17-40 is a first rate lens on both my 1.6 and 1.3 crop bodies. I shoot many scenes with flat horizons. Barrel distortion has never been a problem for me, and I'm persnickety about my horizons.

This lens is no slouch. You won't regret your choice.