OT: Canon 17-40L (For Chuck & others)

JB
Posted By
John_Burnett_(JNB)
May 15, 2004
Views
175
Replies
5
Status
Closed
Chuck, I know you were considering the Canon EF 17-40L. I have now been on two ‘outings’ with one, and I must say that the accolades this lens garners from Canon users is deserved. To date I have used the original Digital Rebel ‘kit’ lens, a Tokina 17mm f3.5 prime, a Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 ‘di’ lens and the Canon 17-40L. There are a variety of small things that all add up to the Canon being the favourite – slightly better sharpness, slightly better contrast, slightly better colour, better (faster, more accurate) focusing. That’s not to say you can’t get good pictures with any of the others (I have some 8×12’s from the Tokina and Tamron that I’m VERY happy with) but, with the copies of each lens that *I* tried, the 17-40L was the clear winner.

I know you can’t tell a whole bunch from resized pics, but here are some from the most recent outing down into the Niagara gorge. You’ll notice that almost all of them were taken at 17mm! 🙂

<http://www.pbase.com/burnettjn/niagara>
Related Tags
canon

How to Master Sharpening in Photoshop

Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.

CS
Chuck_Snyder
May 15, 2004
John, thanks very much. I’m leaning….may make a decision this weekend. You’ve helped….although my better half might disagree with the use of the word "help"….

🙂

Chuck

p.s. Great shots!!
BC
Bill Crocker
May 15, 2004
What John said, 100%!

Then, a great companion to the 17-40L, is the 70-200L!

Bill Crocker

"John_Burnett_ (JNB)" <@adobeforums.com> wrote in message
Chuck, I know you were considering the Canon EF 17-40L. I have now been on
two ‘outings’ with one, and I must say that the accolades this lens garners from Canon users is deserved. To date I have used the original Digital Rebel ‘kit’ lens, a Tokina 17mm f3.5 prime, a Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 ‘di’ lens and the Canon 17-40L. There are a variety of small things that all add up to the Canon being the favourite – slightly better sharpness, slightly better contrast, slightly better colour, better (faster, more accurate) focusing. That’s not to say you can’t get good pictures with any of the others (I have some 8×12’s from the Tokina and Tamron that I’m VERY happy with) but, with the copies of each lens that *I* tried, the 17-40L was the clear winner.
I know you can’t tell a whole bunch from resized pics, but here are some
from the most recent outing down into the Niagara gorge. You’ll notice that almost all of them were taken at 17mm! 🙂
<http://www.pbase.com/burnettjn/niagara>
DS
Dick_Smith
May 15, 2004
John,

What wonderful photos. The 17mm angle does that equate to 17mm on a 35 or is it more is closer to a 25-30mm on a 35?

Dick
JB
John_Burnett_(JNB)
May 15, 2004
Thank you Dick. The 17mm on a Digital Rebel is equivalent to 27.2mm on a regular 35mm film camera (focal length times 1.6 to get the equivalent lens ‘field of view’). In other words, it’s like having the framing of a 28mm lens.

It’s at the wide end of things that digital SLRs with less than a full-sized sensor (and that’s the vast majority of them) are a little hobbled. On a film camera, 17mm would be ‘ultra-wide’ but on the Rebel it’s just a wide-angle. From a design perspective, it’s a lot tougher to build a really good ultra-wide lens, and, therefore, the good ones are few, and quite costly.
DS
Dick_Smith
May 16, 2004
John,

Thanks for the explanation. I thought as much, but it’s nice to have it confirmed.

None the less, the images are terrific.

Dick

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections