| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/18/2005 12:22:50 PM · #1 |
So, I currently own the EFS-17-85. I love this lens. It is f4-5.6 with IS. Honestly, I shoot almost exclusively with it wide open. I love big wide landscapes. My biggest complaint with it is that sometimes at the edges of photos the image becomes a little soft. I was wondering if I should sell this lens and get the 17-40 L. I know that the canon "L" series is really good, but what I was wondering is if this lens is optically really THAT MUCH better at the wide end. I would be losing the IS and some focal lenth. I do have the 50mm 1.8 and a 70-200 f4 L. So I basically can fill the gaps left by the 17-85 (with much more lens changing) So tell me just how sharp that 17-40 is.
drake
PS. Hair lip, hair lip. |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:30:22 PM · #2 |
I have no experience with the 17-40L. If you love WIDE landscapes, consider keeping the 17-85 and getting a 10-22 or 12-24 for the wide end. See my portfolio or Nshapiro's to see what THAT can do for you :-)
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-09-18 12:39:56.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:34:34 PM · #3 |
its not f/2.8. its f4.0 fixed. and from what i hear its sharper but not my too much.
the main difference in the two lenses is not the sharpness. its IS and RANGE vs. upgradeability, L build.
plus if youre shooting on a rebel xt, you'll need to buy another hood. the one it comes with it 99.9% useless.
EDIT: i was referencing bear_musics post about the f/2.8, but he fixed!
Message edited by author 2005-09-18 12:41:23.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:39:13 PM · #4 |
whoops, brain-fart. I just woke up. Fixed post, was confusing it with another lens, the 24-70 f/2.8 L. I have no experience with the 17-40...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:48:38 PM · #5 |
hehe. no worries. I have been looking at that 10-22. That thing is WIDE. I like it. I can't believe the lack of barrel distortion on it. So now the vision has gotten muddier. Is the consensus then, that the 17-40 isn't THAT MUCH sharper than the 17-85?
drake |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 12:52:10 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by fstopopen:
hehe. no worries. I have been looking at that 10-22. That thing is WIDE. I like it. I can't believe the lack of barrel distortion on it. So now the vision has gotten muddier. Is the consensus then, that the 17-40 isn't THAT MUCH sharper than the 17-85?
drake |
From what I've read, yes. No first-hand experience, though. The 10-22 is an extraordinary lens. It's not useable on larger sensors, though; it's designed specifically for 1.6 crop sensors like 20D and 350xt. The Sigma 12-24, on the other hand, will cover full-frame sensors. However, since the 10-22mm Canon is specifically engineered for the 1.6 sensor area, its optical performance is maximized in that range, and it's quite extraordinary.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 02:08:42 PM · #7 |
I have a brand new, unopened 17-40 f/4L that I could sell for less than B&H prices. I have the same lens at the office and it is indeed VERY sharp (but I haven't seen a 17-85 for comparison), plus the constant f/4 aperture means the focus stays the same as you zoom. After I ordered the 17-40, I found a good deal on the 10-22 (which will be in my hands tomorrow- woohoo!), so I won't need the 17-40 after all.
Message edited by author 2005-09-18 14:09:18. |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 02:14:04 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by fstopopen:
PS. Hair lip, hair lip. |
LOL.. when I heard it it was "hunch back, hunch back"
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 02:44:47 PM · #9 |
GO to //www.fredmiranda.com and read reviews of both and see which one you think you should get.
The 17-40 F4 L is an amazing lens and is at it's best at the wide end. Sharper then the 16-35 F2.8 L at the wide end.
//www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=3&sort=7&cat=27&page=1
The 17-85 is a good lens from what I hear, I have never used it. THe only real complaint I hear about it is it's not sharp at the wide end, and it's at its best about 50mm.
//www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=222&sort=7&cat=27&page=2
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 03:06:16 PM · #10 |
I love the 17-40mm lens :)
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 04:20:31 PM · #11 |
the 17-40 L f4 is an excellent lens, but it's not as wide as your EFS 17-85, the EFS is 17mm at the wide end on your 350XT, but the 17-40 is only 27.2mm at the wide end on the 350XT, to get full 17mm on the 17-40 you will need a full frame camera.
so keep the 17-85 and save up for a better camera ;)
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 04:29:54 PM · #12 |
no man, 17 mm is 17 mm. the 17-85 is no wider than the 17-40.
It's designed for the ef-s mounts, but it doesn't convert the focal length numbers to match the 1.6 crop. Lens focal lengths are still all listed in standard 35 mm focal length. |
|
|
|
09/18/2005 05:04:09 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by petrakka:
no man, 17 mm is 17 mm. the 17-85 is no wider than the 17-40.
It's designed for the ef-s mounts, but it doesn't convert the focal length numbers to match the 1.6 crop. Lens focal lengths are still all listed in standard 35 mm focal length. |
we're both right, the EF-S mount simulates the full frame, so ththe 17mm is always 17mm, but the 17-40 equals 28-64 on the 1.6 crop cameras, while the EF-S 17-85 remains 17-85 on the 1.6 crop, you do not need to recalculate the EF-S lenses for the 1.6 crop since they are made only for the 1.6 crop and you get the same perspective with EF-S on 1.6 crop camera as you get with EF on fullframe.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2005 05:09:11 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
Originally posted by petrakka:
no man, 17 mm is 17 mm. the 17-85 is no wider than the 17-40.
It's designed for the ef-s mounts, but it doesn't convert the focal length numbers to match the 1.6 crop. Lens focal lengths are still all listed in standard 35 mm focal length. |
we're both right, the EF-S mount simulates the full frame, so ththe 17mm is always 17mm, but the 17-40 equals 28-64 on the 1.6 crop cameras, while the EF-S 17-85 remains 17-85 on the 1.6 crop, you do not need to recalculate the EF-S lenses for the 1.6 crop since they are made only for the 1.6 crop and you get the same perspective with EF-S on 1.6 crop camera as you get with EF on fullframe. |
No... the 17-85 becomes a 28- whatever 85x1.6 is on the 1.6crop camera.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/21/2025 07:06:29 PM EDT.
