5D and the 17-40mm

[charles_lipton]

I just sold most all my equipment to finance my 5D. I sold my 70-200mm IS,

300mm f4 IS and 1.4X TC. I am getting away from telephoto's and going more

towards WA lenses. I did keep my 17-40mm, 28-70mm L, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, and

100mm macro II.

 

I want to buy the 24-105mm as my all purpose walk around / travel lens but

will need to sell one more lens. I truely love my 28-70mm L but I believe

it's not as practical now as is the 24-105mm for a walk around lens nor do I

feel there is a focal length redundancy. I am leaning more towards selling

the 17-40mm now that I don't have my 20D. I believe for most all

applications, except specialized jobs, 24mm should be wide enough.

 

The question: Of those of you who have the 17-40mm and the 24-105mm with the

5D or any other full frame SLR, how often do you use the 17-40mm in comparison

to the 24-105mm and do you still find a need for it?

 

Thanks..

Chuck

[savas_kyprianides]

Here is a good thread that addresses that question.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Guor&tag=

 

you can copy and paste the url in your browner if it is not clickable here for some reason.

[loren_cain]

I have had the 5D and 24-105mm since last fall, and use the combination all the time. I also have the 17-40mm, but frankly, I don't think I have ever even mounted the 5D on it. I find 24mm to be plenty wide for general outdoor work, and rarely desire anything wider. Of course, there are the occasional moments where I am backed up against a cliff thinking, "If I could only step back another 6 feet I could get this entire waterfall in the frame", but that's rare.

 

For me, photography and hiking are synonymous, so I try to limit the weight of the gear I carry (more so as I get older). I find the 24-105mm f/4 IS and 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and 1.4x are generally all I want to carry (I'd love a 70-200 f/4 IS).

 

Like you, I also have a 28-70mm f/2.8 L, but I almost never use it any more. For me, having IS gives me the option of hiking without a tripod if I really want to cut down on weight (and the light allows). Someday, I'd like to make an adapter that would let me connect two hiking staffs into an elongated "X" (bipod) configuration, with the camera lens resting in the upper "V" section, but that's another story...

[mark_chappell]

FWIW (not a lot): I tried my 17-40 on a friend's 5D once. The corner sharpness was not very

inspiring, which surprised me because that lens gives very pleasing results on film and on a

1.3X crop DSLR. I don't have enough data to know if the less-than-wonderful corner results

on the 5D were a fluke, but the experience somewhat cooled my desire for a FF DSLR for

wideangle work.

[PuppyDigs]

I too have a 5D and 17-40 4L. It's a great zoom but half the range is too wide for most of my

work. I find myself mainly at the long end. However I still have a 1.6 crop body too, so I'm

keeping it for now.

 

I really liked the speed and size of the 50 1.4 USM but it wasn't sharp enough unless stopped

down to F5.6 or F8, so I sold it. Amazingly, the 24-105 is much sharper than the 50 1.4 at

50 F4. So, for past 10 weeks I've mainly used my 24-105 L on the 5D.

 

However, the choice of keeping the 17-40 is purely personal.

[fourfa]

this is purely a question of personal taste, so I'm not sure how much our opinions matter. Some people just aren't crazy about ultra wide angle photos in general, if you're one of those people then you already know what to do.

 

Personally I often use the wide end of the 17-40 for events, action/adventure type stuff, and wide angle landscapes quite a bit. For the former the corners don't matter and for the latter I'm stopped down to f11 or f16 and the corners on mine are plenty sharp there.

[mark_lewis2]

I guess I'll be the oddball here: my 17-40 is nearly permanently set at 17mm and I wish it

would go wider. I have never had a "crop" body, only fullframe sensors and dearly wish for

wider good optics. Before I switched to digital I used the gear of a different manufacturer

and their 14mm was one of my more used optics/

mark

www.markpix.com

[images_in_light_north_west]

I have both 17-40 and 24-105 I use the 24-105 on my 30D but love the 17-40 on my A2, my next camera will be FF digital and I want that lens on it.

[bellavance]

Not much. Most of the time, 24mm is wide enough for me.

 

Pierre

[dmanthree]

I'v got the 17-40, 24-105, and 70-200 f4. I use the 24-105 most of the time; about 70% and

the other two lenses the rest of the time. But when you need wide, it's a great lens. Could I

live without it? sure, but I'd miss it.

[Ken Katz]

Sort of simple, if you don't want, need, or use any focal lenth wider than 24mm, then sell the 17-40. If not keep it. How can any of use determine what focal lenths work best for you?

[nels]

I have 5D with both 17-40L and 24-105L, among other lenses. As a general purpose walk-around lens, I usually have 24-105L on my 5D. If I'm out visiting places where I may be shooting in cramped interiors, I'll pack 17-40L in the bag that carries the body and two lenses. Otherwise the 17-40L usually stays at home. However, going by what I've shot so far, the 17-40L is my second most used lens, despite the fact that I like my 70-200IS a lot.

 

YMMV, but 24-105L IS and 5D are an awesome combo for me.

[chiswick_john]

Only you can answer this as everones style of shooting is different - I use my 16-35L the most on my 5D because a shoot a lot of interiors.Someone who shoots wildlife may not use it at all. I'd keep it and get the Tamron 28-75 as walkaround lens. The Tamron has less distortion, less vignetting, is smaller, way cheaper and just as sharp if not sharper.

[steve_crist]

I have the 17-40, 24-70, 70-200 and 50 1.4 lenses. I just got a 5D and now my most used lens (on the 5D) is the 24-70. On my 20D the most used lens is the 17-40. The 17-40 on a full frame camera at 17mm is wide! You'll never be backed up against a wall with an actual 17mm lens.

[patricks]

i always said and believed that less is indeed more. sell the 28-70 L, sell the 17-40 L, buy the 24-105 and keep the primes.

 

Since i got it, the 24-105 hardly leaves my 5D.

[james_de_h]

I posed a near similar question but in reference to my 16-35mm lens. A message that came back was wait, try using the lens on the 5D and only after really thinking decide whether or not to sell it on. It proved good advice. There have been several occasions where the 16-35mm has enabled me to win a shot that the 24mm end of the 24-105 would not have allowed. Keep your 17-40. My 16-35mm is on my 5D as I tap this out and the two work together really well. Oh, don't get hooked up on light fall off in the corners!

 

Regards

 

James

[photographicsafaris]

I have a 5D with 17-40, 28-70L, 50 1.4 and 70-200f4L. I am surprised that the 24-105 is

that much better and you're getting it. However it is an obvous choice that you loose the

28-70. When you need 20mm or wider you have it, you dont need the 28-70 range. the

50mm 1.4 covers it.

 

Interestingly I have found that the 50mm 1.4 is razor sharp, Dont know whay someone is

complaining about it, unless they are missing the focus point or back focusing.

 

When I got the 17-40 it was for a film camera and I was so excited to have it on full frame

digital when I swapped from 10D to 5D In tight groups it comes into its own, particulalry

to give a sense of scale I have great shots from the inside of the Landrover showing clients

inside the car and elephants outside. Its great for that sort of thing.

 

Also weddings, absolutely invaluable. and some wildlife shots using my infa red wireless

remote couldnt have been done with anything else.

 

To answer your question I use the 17-40 much less than the 28-70 which is my main

people lens. In fact I have to go out of my way to use the 17-40 and when I do the results

are better than those I get from the others because you have to think much more.

 

Cheers G<div></div>