quicksilver1 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Guys, I have shortlisted 17-40L f4 for the wide angle shooting. Just wondering the weakest points? Do you see any vignetting at the wide angle? Is there any workaround for it? Any other weak points of the lens other than it's slow aperture? Any replies appreciated. Thanks, Raj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
les Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 What can I say other than all things said already ? It is a wonderful lense, I can't compare it to any other wide angle since I haven't owned any before. No wignetting I can see on Elan7, sharpness is excellent, but I still have to make a print larger than A4. It is probably the best wide angle you can get for $700. And not much better (if any) for twice that much (except 1 stop faster). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bellavance Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I'm extremely satisfied with 17-40/4L, but quickly getting spoiled by large aperture lenses, such as the 50/1.4 and 70-200/2.8L IS. Maybe I should have gotten the 16-35/2.8L instead. I use these lenses on an EOS 10D by the way. Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_katz1 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I use this lens on an EOS 3 body. There is no vignetting, and at the 17mm setting, it is probably Canon's sharpest wide-angle lens. I sold my EF 16-35mm f2.8L after testing this lens, and haven't regretted it for a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anand_n._vishwamitran Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Bob, how do you compare the 16-35mm f/2.8L and the 17-40 f/4L? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_katz1 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 The 17-40 is sharper and has less flare at the wide end than the 16-35. At the longer end, the 16-35 is a bit sharper, but I usually use these lenses at the widest settings, so for me the 17-40 was the clear winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin_lee Posted November 23, 2003 Share Posted November 23, 2003 Luminous Landscape has a nice comparison between the 17-40 and the 16-35. <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml">http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml</a> 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