eugene_gav Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I'm in search for a "wide" angle zoom for my drebel, and can't decide between Canon's ancient 20-35 f/2.8 or the new 17-40 f/4 zoom (both relatively in the same price range). I really really really want the extra stop (and I wish I could afford the 16-35 lens), but from what I read its autofocus is rather slow. (Yes, USM is faster than no USM). Just how "bad" is its autofocus? Keep in mind, that I likely won't need to hunt down speedy football players or the like, thus blazing fast AF isn't necessarily that important, but will it bog me down for PJ-type work? (I don't really care too much about the minute differences in the sharpness of either lens.) I'd love to try each lens on for myself, but I can't find the 20-35/2.8 zoom in my area (Wash DC), so I'd have to order it from KEH or the like. Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribook Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Eugene,</p>Of the two lenses you are looking at, I own only the 20-35 f/2.8 so I can't offer you a comparison, but I can tell you that this is my walkaround lens on my Canon 10D and I've never noticed any problems with autofocus speed. In fact, I have no complaints about this lens. Here's a sample photo taken with this combination. --Russ<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnlund Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Unless you've eliminated it as a candidate for a reason, there's also Canon's discontinued <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/17-35">17-35/2.8L</a>. It tends to sell for about the same price as the other two you mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 >> I really really really want the extra stop I wonder why. I use the widest aperture quite often on my tele lenses but rarely on my wide ones. Me? I'd go for the 17-40/4. For me (YMMV) the wider focal range and faster AF speed (I really really really :-) miss that on my primes) are more important than the extra stop. I had the 17-35/2.8 USM L but didn't like it. Sharpness was unacceptable below f/5.6. Flare was always a main concern (and yes, I used the lens hood at all times). Distortion was evident at 20mm and below. In addition, I used it almost exclusively in either 24mm or 35mm settings. Thus, I sold it and bought the 35/2 and 24/2.8 primes. Optically, they are far superior. Happy shooting , Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppyDigs Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I'd go for the newer design. AF is really good on the 17-40. I don't think 20mm is wide enough for a 1.6x body. Sometimes the light’s all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. - Robert Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg M Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 The extra 3mm does make a difference at the wide angle end, in my opinion. Optically, the 20-35 would be a great lens, but lately all the 20-35 f2.8 Canon lenses I've been seeing for sale have had problems- broken af/mf switches, lens scratches & worn exteriors, etc. Keep in mind in all likelyhood if the AF module goes out there are probably no replacements & most of the ones out there today have alot of mileage on them. If you can find a really clean one that was used by an amatuer you'll likely be OK, but they're not cheap on the second-hand market. Nice ones are probably close to $500. For not much more money you can get a new, current 17-40 f4L. I don't think you'll miss the f2.8 aperture that much with the Digital Rebel's clean noise patterns at the higher ISO settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I love my 17-40 but if you contemplate shooting architecture, or other things with straight lines, you need to know that at the wide end especially it has some barrel distortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_dunn2 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 <p>I don't personally have much need for a fast wide lens, either - but on a 1.6x body, the 17-40 extends from wide through normal and slightly into medium tele, and I <em>do</em> see uses for fast normal and tele lenses. Particularly given <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/digitaldof.html" target="_blank">the greater DOF on a 1.6x body</a>. So I can understand the desire for a faster lens.</p> <p>I'd echo the comment about 20 not being wide enough. On your drebel, the 20-35 gives a 32mm equivalent at its wide end. That's not wide enough for me; is it wide enough for you? If not, it's pretty much ruled out, and you're left with the 17-40/4 (or, as someone else suggested, a used 17-35/2.8).</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_zimmet Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 Not to knock the 20-35mm f/2.8L, which is a very nice lens, but the non-L 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is one of Canon's better non-L lenses. It's got fast USM focusing and a non-rotating front element (convenient when using a polarizer) - I'm not sure the 20-35mm L can claim as much. Is nearly the L lens' equal when stopped down a little. And I not infrequently see them selling used, but in mint condition, for $225 or so. Heck, I bought mine not long ago in pristine condition, including the matched Canon lens hood (which is a big, clumsy thing, and only "matched" if one has the lens on a 35mm film EOS or a 24x36mm digital SLR, so I just use a cheap rubber lens hood), box, etc., for $225, inc. shipping. Well, it's something you might want to consider, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now