Canon EF 17-40mm - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/27/2013 03:59:57 PM · #1

The question is more towards the correct usage of this lens :)

is it truly for landscape only? Can it be used for wedding/maternity or any indoor activity like concert? I believe we can though haven't seen much examples to looking for some guidance before go and swipe card :)

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/27/2013 04:34:00 PM · #2

Of course. You can use it for whatever wide angle purpose you like. f/4 is a little slow for indoors and concerts, but high ISO on the 6D can make up for that. It's a decent lens, although much more prone to distortion than I was used to with the 10-22.

Depending upon your needs, you might consider the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8. It's manual focus and won't accept filters, but it's extremely sharp, wider and faster than the 17-40, and less than 1/2 the cost.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

06/27/2013 04:36:14 PM · #3

keep people away from the edges at anything under 24mm.

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

06/27/2013 05:23:50 PM · #4

it is more fun to find the incorrect usage :)

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

06/27/2013 05:35:26 PM · #5

judi has put that lens to use with amazing results

06/27/2013 06:47:14 PM · #6

Originally posted by scalvert:

Rokinon is Interesting! See all good reviews! Thanks for the information!

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

06/27/2013 06:47:47 PM · #7

Originally posted by Cory:

keep people away from the edges at anything under 24mm.

Got it but then the actual use would between 24 to 40mm only when it comes to the group of people.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

06/27/2013 07:11:19 PM · #8

Originally posted by pgirish007:

Originally posted by Cory:
keep people away from the edges at anything under 24mm.

Got it but then the actual use would between 24 to 40mm only when it comes to the group of people.

It's true of ANY wide angle lens BTW, not just this one. The wider a lens gets, the more shapes at the edges are distorted. For exactly the same reason that shadows get distorted as you lower the light source. The sight-line to the corners of the frame is VERY oblique compared to at the center.

06/27/2013 07:24:08 PM · #9

Originally posted by pgirish007:

The question is more towards the correct usage of this lens :)

is it trr landscape only? Can it be used for wedding/maternity or any indoor activity like concert? I believe we can though haven't seen much examples to looking for some guidance before go and swipe card :)

I use mine for portraits. The only thing about using this lens is the lack of shallow DOF and not being able to get enough light. I was going to sell mine and get a fast wide prime. I couldnt decide on a focal length and the newer primes are just way overpriced. I figure I'll just rent a fast prime when I need it and continue to use this lens. If you want a wide zoom for portraits maybe look at the 16-35/2.8 but its over twice the cost.

Message edited by author 2013-06-27 19:24:49.

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

06/27/2013 07:59:38 PM · #10

You have a 24-105. Seems like a waste for only a bit wider. I'd look for a fast wide prime maybe a 24 or 28 2.8 IS? Or even pick up a 24-70/2.8 mk1

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

06/27/2013 08:42:24 PM · #11

Originally posted by Mike:

You have a 24-105. Seems like a waste for only a bit wider. I'd look for a fast wide prime maybe a 24 or 28 2.8 IS? Or even pick up a 24-70/2.8 mk1

17mm is a LOT wider than 24mm, Mike. Like, 25% wider. HUGE difference.

06/27/2013 09:00:12 PM · #12

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Mike:
You have a 24-105. Seems like a waste for only a bit wider. I'd look for a fast wide prime maybe a 24 or 28 2.8 IS? Or even pick up a 24-70/2.8 mk1

17mm is a LOT wider than 24mm, Mike. Like, 25% wider. HUGE difference.

yes it is, but my point was is it worth buying a zoom lens when you have 75% of those focal lengths already covered at f4.

Samsung Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra

06/27/2013 10:12:52 PM · #13

Originally posted by Mike:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Mike:
You have a 24-105. Seems like a waste for only a bit wider. I'd look for a fast wide prime maybe a 24 or 28 2.8 IS? Or even pick up a 24-70/2.8 mk1

17mm is a LOT wider than 24mm, Mike. Like, 25% wider. HUGE difference.

yes it is, but my point was is it worth buying a zoom lens when you have 75% of those focal lengths already covered at f4.

Humm..you do have a point Mike!

I was leaning towards 17-40 was because of one factor that is price and a bit wider and was not thinking beyond that :)

Tiberius

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

06/27/2013 10:23:05 PM · #14

If you have the cash I would say it's a nice addition to your collection for the 6D. If you really need something wide I would suggest get the Rokinon as

scalvert suggested.

Anyway, keep us posted.

Samsung Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra

06/27/2013 11:00:37 PM · #15

is this the one that Scalvert suggested?

Tiberius

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

06/27/2013 11:19:45 PM · #16

Yep. A good review I read some time ago.

Oddly enough I end up buying the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L Ha!

Samsung Galaxy S22, S22+, S22 Ultra

06/27/2013 11:20:42 PM · #17

just so you know, the 17-40 will be about the field or view and distortion your sigma 10-20 is on your 50D

FWIW, i did a test shoot indoors at my wife's kickboxing class with it to see what kind of shutter speeds i could get in a well lit gym for a shoot i will be doing. no flash, no composition, just seeing how the gear handled the light and what speeds i would need for various movements.

the first was shot with the 17-40L at 17mm you can see noise as the ISO was up at 6400 to get a shutter of at least 1/400 to freeze this action.

//i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff365/mike_311/tina%20kickboxing/IMG_5735_zps3bdb5f13.jpg

the second was with a 50mm at f/1.8, 1/400, but the iso was 3200 and the image is much better exposed and a lot less noisy, i probably could have shot at 1600 and pulled the RAW up in post or closed the lens down a bit for more DOF.

//i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff365/mike_311/tina%20kickboxing/IMG_5654_zpsc1705c28.jpg

its not the best indoor lens, especially portraits where cleaning the noise makes them less sharp. my primes performed much better obviously and were more versatile, i'll be renting some fast primes for the official shoot.

outside the lens is great, indoors you need faster, unless you use flash.

Tiberius

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

06/27/2013 11:23:15 PM · #18

Originally posted by Mike:

just so you know, the 17-40 will be about the field or view and distortion your sigma 10-20 is on your 50D

I wanted to point out this too. If you can keep both cameras then no real need for the 17-40

Edit: @

Mike nice roundhouse kick :-)

Message edited by author 2013-06-27 23:24:56.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/28/2013 12:34:31 AM · #19

Originally posted by pgirish007:

is this the one that Scalvert suggested?

Yes, and I own one, too.

06/28/2013 06:00:36 AM · #20

Originally posted by Tiberius:

Edit: @ Mike nice roundhouse kick :-)

when she tells me i cant buy any new lenses i listen.

06/28/2013 06:04:55 AM · #21

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by pgirish007:
is this the one that Scalvert suggested?

Yes, and I own one, too.

just out our curiosity, i toyed with selling my 17-40 and buying one of these to complement a faster prime. how easy is it to focus these on people? landscape is no problem, just focus to infinity :) or live view if closer focus is needed, but for other subjects, like hose that tend to move, for instance?

06/28/2013 07:45:56 AM · #22

So I got this!

if I am keeping 50D and 10-20mm then dont need to buy 17-40mm -- answer to this is yes I am keeping both 50D and 10-20mm as 10-20mm goes well with 50d compare to 6D.

After reading the thread again I am dropping idea of buying 17-40 and now looking for Rokinon 14mm though my purpose is to have a wide angle lens and also help me to shoot sometime portraits otherwise I have 50mm as well as 85mm and they goes well with portraits so not a big deal.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/28/2013 07:57:11 AM · #23

i dont think you want a 14mm for portraits unless you intentionally want to introduce wild distortion.

you may prefer a 28mm or 35mm or going longer, like a 135L or 200L.

//500px.com/photo/27644297

//500px.com/photo/8078521

//500px.com/photo/7449911

//500px.com/photo/29279209

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/28/2013 09:14:41 AM · #24

Originally posted by Mike:

just out our curiosity, i toyed with selling my 17-40 and buying one of these to complement a faster prime. how easy is it to focus these on people?

To be honest, I've never tried the Rokinon for that. I mostly use mine for interior real estate photos and landscapes. I suppose it depends on your familiarity with manual focus. The mechanism is very smooth, and the DOF at 14mm gives you a lot of leeway. The printed focus scale on this lens is not accurate, but for my purposes setting the lens to focus around 1 or 2m and f/8 covers everything.

Important tip: the Rokinon produces complex distortion that cannot be fixed with a simple barrel adjustment, however THIS inexpensive software works great for correction. The difference is amazing. See example here.

Message edited by author 2013-06-28 09:18:02.