Welcome Guest, Please Login or Register!
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Support RL
Home Forum Aquarium Log Gallery Sponsors RHO Bookstore

Canon's 17-40 f4 L lens

Go Back   Reeflands Forum > General > Photo Lab
Sponsored Links
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-12-2006, 11:00 AM   #1
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Question Canon's 17-40 f4 L lens

Mike,

Do you own or have any experiences with this lens? I did some research on it and so far the opinions are quite contradicting...some rave about it and some say it is a cheap imitation and too soft and so on. I was thinking of replacing that kit lens, finally, for the wider angle shots.
After I put my Sigma macro lens on the new cam I hardly take it off anymore. It performs so much better now but kit lens is simply rediculous. It was working better on my 300D.
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Old 01-13-2006, 11:17 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
Sorry I missed this Gene, here is a good link comparing the 17-40 to the 16-35, it is one I see referrenced all the time when people want to know about either lens. Michael is a VERY detail reviewer, and he carries an EXCELLENT reputation.

I have been considering the 17-40 for a long time, but now that I am planning on the 1D, I think my 24-70 will be wide enough.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...on-17-40.shtml
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 11:52 AM   #3
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Thanks, Mike.
It is so much cheaper than the 16-35 f2.8 that I thought that there may be a reason why it is almost half the price of the faster lens.
I know you are happy with your 24-70 lens and it would probably be even better on the 1D but I don't know if it will be wide enough on my little cam.

Maybe I'm just paranoid and should stick with my other lenses for a while? I mean I have enough reach with both the 28-135 and 24-135( which is full stop faster, almost) and concentrate on saving money for the 135mm f2.0 prime lens that everybody is raving about. I'm trying to sell my 28-135 IS and maybe get a portion of the price back so I can add it for that prime.
A friend of mine is shooting with Tamron 28-75 f2.8 lens om his 20D( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation)
that he said he likes better than some of his "L" glass, very sharp and so much cheaper. I just don't know. So many lenses to choose from ...

PS. By the way,Mike, full frame cam will probably double your productivity, eh?
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 12:38 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
Remember that 1 stop is DOUBLE the light, so it is EXPENSIVE! Actually the 16-35 is considered by many as the SOFTEST of the L zooms, but it sure is still big money! I'll bet I still end up with a 17-40 at some point, depending on how many weddings I book this year, I have 9 already towards my goal of only 20.

LOL! No not quite, the 1D has a 1.3 crop factor to it, so I am still not full frame. I need the speed of the 1D for sports and moving brides! The 5D is full frame, but slower on FPS and focus. Plus I really want a 1D just for the build and weather sealing. THe 1D N also has a larger LCD, and new "picture modes" whatever that is....

That 28-135 should be an easy sell, if you want I can post it for sale in the buy/sell forum @ Fred Miranda, or you could always do the E-bay thing!

I considered that Tamron, but I am a firm believer in OEM glass. The L glass from Canon sells USED for 85-90% of new so if I ever do need to unload it I will get most of the money back. 3rd party usually does not hold value as well, of course there are exceptions to that.

THe 135 is a FANTASTIC portrait lens, but it may be a bit long on your 1.6 crop. Have you considered the 85 1.8? It is only 300 or so and has excellent reviews all around.
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 12:54 PM   #5
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Hmm, I wonder why they list 1D MarkII as a full frame camera then?
Oh, well...

Which 85 1.8 are you talking about,this one?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

BTW, here's what I'm talking about when I said that I saw 1Ds MII advertised as a FF cam.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2006, 05:58 PM   #6
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
That "s" is the difference! It also costs about $3000 MORE I believe! I am going for the "1D mark II N" for $3999.

YES that is the 85 I was talking about.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...7&cat=2&page=2

Unless you want this one :
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...7&cat=2&page=1

We should all have f1.2!!!


And this is the camera:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 12:17 AM   #7
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Lightbulb

Thanks, Mike.

I'll say fork the extra 4 grand and get that 1Ds MII cam. it will pay off in the long run.

I think I'll get thet 85mm lens, sounds like a real bargain for the speed it offers. I know I love my 50mm f1.8 so a little longer reach with the speed of 1.8 worth all the money.

BTW, check out this images i took with my Sigma 24-135mm f2.8 lens. I thought it performed well with the lousy light I had to deal with.
Attached Thumbnails
canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0265.jpg   canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0263-copy.jpg   canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0211-copy.jpg   canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0224.jpg  
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 09:23 AM   #8
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
LOL! That extra 4K makes that camera the same price as a CAR!!! I can't say I need all 16 megapixels, those files are HUGE, especially in RAW. The 1D has 2 memory card slots, CF and SD, with the ability to send RAW to one, and .jpeg to the other. So as it is, I will be buying more memory! YIKES! I may also put the 24-105 f4IS L on my list for this year, that should work pretty good for Weddings, and it gives a little more reach then my 24-70, but less light.

Those shots turned out very nice! I still think that yellow tang needs some valium or something! Do you ever wonder if anything lives UNDER that huge anemone of your??? LOL I can't see the rock work at all!
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 11:29 AM   #9
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Quote:
Do you ever wonder if anything lives UNDER that huge anemone of your??? LOL I can't see the rock work at all!
Nope, I know exactly what lives there...more anemones.
I think all the real estate in that tank has been captured by anemone troops and any resistance by all others will be futile.

On that cam, I agree that it cost a whole mess of dollars but what a machine it is... Although, I probably could never figure out what to do with it to enjoy it fully.
I meant to ask you about the bokeh that those prime, large aperture L lenses offer. Is is smooth and silky like they say it is? I know that at f1.8 my 50mm lens don't have any bokeh to speak off so I figured the lens must be designed somehow to do that. Right?
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 05:39 PM   #10
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
I think it is designed in somewhat. Believe it or not it has to with the number of blades on the shutter!

You should get pretty good bokeh with your 50, you may just have to be closer to the subject.

I have been wanting that 85 1.8 for indoor sports. I think it will be a MUST HAVE on the 1D.

My tax return can't get here fast enough! Hey how about you buy that 1Ds, and you can just loan it to me for a while...
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2006, 08:44 PM   #11
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Yeah right, I'm too cheap to buy an L lens and you want me to buy 8 grand camera... Highly unlikely, my friend.
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 02:27 PM   #12
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Hey Mike,

After all this talk about the 17-40L lens I ended up buying Tamron's 28-75 f2.8 lens( I don't know why I do this things... ) Just got it today and took couple of quick shots, didn't play with much settings or what not. Basically wide open shots as I wanted to see how it will do with the larger aperture set up.
Here's couple shots I took and first impression I got, so far, that it was sharp lens and color rendition was extremely accurate. I will play with different settings and see how it does. I also like the construction of it, auto focus was extremely fast in dimly lit area and once locked it didn't creep or anything.
Attached Thumbnails
canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0369.jpg   canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0363.jpg   canon-s-17-40-f4-l-lens-img_0367.jpg  
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 05:27 PM   #13
Owner
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bardstown, KY
Posts: 13,046
Well I've never seen such horrible pictures before.
__________________
Scott Z.
75 Gallon Reef Log
Powered by Reefland's Personal Online Aquarium Log
Reefland is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 05:34 PM   #14
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
I tend to agree...
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 06:15 PM   #15
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
I don't know Gene, that last one looks like it is almost out of focus. What was the shutter speed and ISO? Maybe it was just camera shake I am seeing. THe middle picture is cool, but not a good one for judging a lens, since the water refracts the subject.

I agree the color looks very good! However I just don't see a reason for this particular lens, don't you already have this range covered in your Sigma? Is this lens smaller and lighter?

Please understand I am not trying to make you reconsider, if you like it, by all means keep it as this lens has had some excellent reviews. I'll bet it finds its way onto a semi-permanent spot on the camera!
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 07:44 PM   #16
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poseidon
I don't know Gene, that last one looks like it is almost out of focus. What was the shutter speed and ISO? Maybe it was just camera shake I am seeing. THe middle picture is cool, but not a good one for judging a lens, since the water refracts the subject.

I agree the color looks very good! However I just don't see a reason for this particular lens, don't you already have this range covered in your Sigma? Is this lens smaller and lighter?

Please understand I am not trying to make you reconsider, if you like it, by all means keep it as this lens has had some excellent reviews. I'll bet it finds its way onto a semi-permanent spot on the camera!
Mike,

It is much lighter than my Sigma and I think it is the range that I need for walk around purposes. I sure wish it was a bit wider but length is just perfect to shoot inside the house. As far as focus, yeah, hand shake it is. I may need to send it back though for recalibration, I think it can be sharper than what I;ve seen so far.
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 09:09 PM   #17
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
I think so too. Why would you have to send it back yourself though? Can't you just exchange it, or did you get it from an individual?

I'm anxious to hear what happens, this is one of the reasons I stick with OEM glass. Canon service is as good as it gets!
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2006, 09:42 PM   #18
Owner
 
zhenya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new jersey,usa
Posts: 7,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poseidon
I think so too. Why would you have to send it back yourself though? Can't you just exchange it, or did you get it from an individual?

I'm anxious to hear what happens, this is one of the reasons I stick with OEM glass. Canon service is as good as it gets!
Mike, I'll be on the phone come tomorrow morning. I read in one of the reviews that it is pretty delicate and if it gets bumped or something it gets out of wack. You know how those delivery guys can be...
Anyways, I might just exchange it if B&H lets me.
__________________
Kind regards,

Gene.
zhenya is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 02:17 AM   #19
New in Town
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 4
I don't post very often but I read as much as I can on this site to learn more about reefkeeping. Anyways, I make my living here in CA as a photographer and have enough camera gear to outfit CNN. For 35mm I shoot Canon and would be glad to answer any questions you guys have. I figure I should contribute something to reefland since I have garnered so much information from you guys and others.
mattymatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2006, 09:59 AM   #20
Moderator
 
Poseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Swartz Creek, MI
Posts: 6,366
Send a message via AIM to Poseidon
Hi Matt, welcome to the lab! Do you really still shoot 35mm?

I am shooting weddings and sports, I hope to be full time photographer in 2007! I may pick your brain on a couple lenses, or if you get ready to sell any make sure to let me know!
__________________
Need a Photographer?

Just say NO to CRABS

Mike
Poseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon's 28-135mm IS lens zhenya Photo Lab 8 08-14-2005 09:36 PM
which lens to take on vacation? zhenya Photo Lab 10 07-02-2005 04:33 PM
My new lens is HERE!!! Poseidon Photo Lab 3 06-28-2005 03:28 PM
Sigma Lens Questions? Poseidon Photo Lab 18 06-27-2005 10:48 AM
UV lens? do I need one? Ironaccents Lighting 7 01-16-2002 09:12 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:12 PM.