Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

[stubbyd]

I'm considering getting one of these lenses for my 60D but a couple of questions ...

1. Are there any non Canon equivalents I ought to consider and

2. is it suitable for my 60D.

The 2nd question is an issue for me as I get lost in the techno babble at times. The canon site has this to say:

ultra-wide angle zoom on film or full-frame digital EOS cameras. On DSLRs equipped with APS-C sized sensors it acts as a standard zoom,

So does that mean I won't get any wide angledness out of it or ...?

And if so, is there an APS-C equivalent for this lens?

TIA

[RichardTaylor]

It's a very wide angle to almost slightly wide normal (zoom) lens on a full frame camera.
On a 1.6 crop camera it is a wide angle to ~ normal.

The equivalent (APS- C) only are any of the 10/12 to 22/24 range.
Canon make a 10-22.
There are at least 4 third party (Tokina, Sigma, Tamron) lenses in a similar range.

[stubbyd]

Originally Posted by RichardTaylor

The equivalent (APS- C) only are any of the 10/12 to 22/24 range.
Canon make a 10-22.
There are at least 4 third party (Tokina, Sigma, Tamron) lenses in a similar range.

Thanks Richard.

I've just finished reading a review of the Tamron variant and at half the price ....!

[dlambert]

Unfortunately, on a APS-C camera, you really have to look at APS-C-specific lenses. All Canon "L" lenses are suitable for both APS-C and full-frame cameras, and a wide-angle lens for a full-frame camera ends up being only sort-of-wide on a APS-C camera. The zoom range on the 17-40 substantially overlaps the 18-55 kit lens found on entry-level Canon APS-C cameras, so relative to that lens, you're getting slightly faster optics, better build quality, better glass, and so on.

You mentioned that you're looking at this lens for a 60D, but I didn't see you mention which other lenses you have, or what you're planning to shoot with the 17-40. It would also be helpful to know if you're buying EF glass with the intent of going full-frame at some point, or if you plan to stick with a APS-C for a while.

[gturner]

if you already have a kit lens, it it not worthwhile.

I own the 17-40 as my ultrawide on a 5D mkii. It is very good for the purpose.

If you are going to stick with the 60D and want a really wide lens, the canon 10-22 mentioned would be best.

If you want a good workaround for the same money the 15-85 would be my choice.

[stubbyd]

Originally Posted by dlambert

Unfortunately,.... and a wide-angle lens for a full-frame camera ends up being only sort-of-wide on a APS-C camera.

Right that I understand - no techno-babble

The zoom range on the 17-40 substantially overlaps the 18-55 kit lens found on entry-level Canon APS-C cameras, so relative to that lens, you're getting slightly faster optics, better build quality, better glass, and so on.

Understood.

You mentioned that you're looking at this lens for a 60D, but I didn't see you mention which other lenses you have, or what you're planning to shoot with the 17-40. It would also be helpful to know if you're buying EF glass with the intent of going full-frame at some point, or if you plan to stick with a APS-C for a while.

I have the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II (and as I understand these things that is a prime lens) and Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

One came with teh camera the other I was given.

I have no intention of going full frame for a good few years (if ever) and my main aim is to gain a wider angle of shooting for landscapes (mostly) and other bits.

[stubbyd]

Originally Posted by gturner

if you already have a kit lens, it it not worthwhile.

I own the 17-40 as my ultrawide on a 5D mkii. It is very good for the purpose.

If you are going to stick with the 60D and want a really wide lens, the canon 10-22 mentioned would be best.

If you want a good workaround for the same money the 15-85 would be my choice.

See my prior reply as to what lenses I have - are either of these considered kit?

I think a stroll down to my local photo shop to see if I can try some lenses is in order - if they'll let me play that is.

Thanks for your input.

[stubbyd]

As an example of what I'd like to be able to acheive is demonstrated by the following:

Link to image

As a picture this does and says nothing (to me any way) but if I'd had a wider angle then it would have made an entirely different and more appealing shot. That was taken during my lunch break so that you can get an idea of what I'm after.

I appreciate moving back would help but not all cases can one do that - and this was one such.

[dlambert]

What lens were you using for this?

[stubbyd]

Originally Posted by dlambert

What lens were you using for this?

I knew I should have said - the 50mm prime