17-40mm lens on Canon 5D mark II

[thaler design]

<p>I went to a canon dealer who let me try three different lenses on my 5D in his store:<br />Canon 16-35/2.8 II ( store price ~ 1.600 EUR )<br />Canon 17-40/4.0 ( store price ~ 890 EUR )<br />Tamron 17-35/2.8 ( store price ~ 420 EUR )<br />The canon 16-35 is a perfect lens.The Canon 17-40 is bad, the cheap Tamron a little better. I found it in a online store for just 230 EUR - it works good enough for panorama photos but has limits.</p>

<p>Test photos are available</p>

[ray .]

<p>Some Canon lenses are a bit soft, but I've seen some photographers go with it and integrate that characteristic into their style. Granted that might not work for certain commercial applications.</p>

[model mayhem gallery]

<p>This is the first forum I ever been in where I have ever heard anyone say the Canon 17-40 F4L was a BAD lens. I own this lens and have used it on a Canon Drebel, 30D and now my 5D Mark II with absolutely excellent results. I use that lens at F4 all the time has great colors and excellent clarity. However, I haev now started using my older Tamron 28 75 F2.8 simply because it has a better focal length on FF. Still maintains excellent sharpness and for the price works great. Overall, I prefer an F 2.8 lens due to its brighter viewfinder faster focusing in low light and gives me more creative control.<br>

But, I have won two Showcases on Onemodelplace using that 17-40 F4L and can assure you if you are having problems getting good photos on a 5D Mark II with a 17 -40 F4L it is NOT the lens causing the problem.</p>

 

[audun_sjoeseth1]

<p>Photozone.de says that the EF 17-40/4 i a good lens from 20-40mm. I plan to buy it for my 5DII. I don't need the range from 17-19mm. :)</p>