s_perera Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 What do you think about using Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM L as a walk around lens given its 64mm (in 35mm terms) maximun telephoto ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogbert Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Do a search. There is plenty of discussion about this lens. Nearly everyone that owns it likes it. Personally I went for the Sigma 18-50 EX f2.8 DC. Cheaper, longer, smaller filters and f2.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppyDigs Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I own it and love it on FF film bodies. However, I find it a yawn on my 10D: the long end is just too short. Plus the image details are so small at 17mm I'm underwhelmed (due to the small viewfinder--not the lens' fault). For walkaround zooms I far prefer the EF 24-85 3.5 -4.5 USM or EF 28-135 IS USM on 1.6 crop bodies. 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...
jon_austin Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 What the Pupster said. It's an excellent lens for indoor use, or when you want to go wide for landscapes, etc. But for walk-around use, I usually reach for the 24-85, which has a more usable FL range for this purpose, IMO. The 24-85's less sharp than the 17-40L, but since Canon doesn't make a ..., oh, never mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 The 17-40L has long been purported here to be an excellent walk-around lens, even on 1.6 crop DSLRs. Quailty is also reviewed as very high, especially for the relatively low price. My main walk-around is the 16-35 and the 24-70. I've barely used a 17-40 so I cannot comment directly. (My previous walk-around was the aforementioned 24-85.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge_goulart1 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I'll prefer EF 28-135 IS USM just because it has a longer tele... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcolwell Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 If I take only one lens with my 20D, it is usually either the 17-40/4 L or 50/1.4 (or 300/4 L IS, but that's a different walk around). If I take two or three lenses, the 17-40L is usually one of them. Sometimes I shove a SMC Takumar 85/1.8 in my back pocket (just in case), but I probably shouldn't mention that here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 S Perera,<br> I use my 17-40L as my main walk around lens.<br> 90% of my Park Photos were taken with the 17-40L<br> It well worth it's cost (to my eyes).<br> Oh yea and its a 17-40 (27-64mm in 35mm terms). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pto189 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Yes. The Canon 17-40 F4L is an ideal walk-around lens among other candidates such as Canon 16-35 L, 24-70 L, 17-85 IS, 24-85, 28-135 IS, Tamron 17-35, 28-75, Sigma 18-50, 24-70. To me on a DSLR, we need at least 17 or 18 at the wide end. the closest one to the 17-40 is Sigma 18-50 that I've tried but didn't like it. The Canon 17-85 IS is near perfect except EF-S that I don't want to invest my money while waiting on the next 1.3x or full frame DSLR. I did also try most of the about but sold them all and keep the Canon 17-40. Apparently I miss the tele end. But it's ok to me becasue I can't hand hold with the focal length longer than 50 to shoot a sharp picture anyway. Therefore, I use 17-40 for walk around, 24-70 for indoor parties, 100 Macro and 70-200 F4L with a tripod for portrait and close up, and 300 F4L & 1.4x TC for hand held tele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_dunn2 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cuhn&unified_p=1">Discussion of the 17-40 (among others) as a walkaround lens, just two days ago</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_chi1 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Just another thought for you. I no longer walk around with my DSLR setup ever since I bought a Fuji F10 a few month ago. The digital P&S's have kept improving their quality to a degree that it's now comparable to DSLRs mounted with those normal/consumer lenses. And they are pocketable. There is less and less benefit for those "walk around" lenses setup (at least to me.) The P&S will normally covers 35mm to 100 something with very good close focus distance. And I would seriously think why do I ever need a DSLR walk-around lens in this range. Nowadays, most of my lenses are purchased for their superb quality. I have Canon 200 L f/2.8, Canon 400 L f/5.6, Canon 100 f/2.8 macro, and probably Canon 135 f/2.0 in the foresee-able future. And I enjoy walk with my Fuji F10 very much due to its great image quality and very very light weight. I suggest you think more about what you really want to do before buying/changing lenses. Eric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francois_gauthier Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 It depends on what you shoot. For a tourism perspective, where it is likely from or near a vehicule and subjects are often architecture or monuments, wide is precious and the 17-40 would do fine. From a 'walk around' where people are often targetted, the 24-85 offers a better range from slightly wide to small tele. A nice compromise range/aperture/price. The 28-105 offers best range for the buck but 28 (with cropping factor) is just not wide enough in my opinion. Too bad because there is a vast choice of 28 to something zooms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 >> It depends on what you shoot. Words of wisdom. What is right for me has nothing to do with what is right for you. Happy shooting, Yakim. 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