 My walkaround lens |
| Review Date: November 3, 2006 |
| Reviewer: NutMac, Mountain View, CA |
The walkaround lens. This very topic leads to a heated discussion among DSLR photographers.
First, determine your budget, focal length, and aperture needs.
If you frequently find yourself zooming out to get all in a frame, you will want a wide angle lens such as this. If you frequently find yourself zooming in, this is not the lens for you. On a full frame body such as Canon EOS 5D, this lens becomes ULTRA wide angle. On an APS-C crop body such as Digital Rebel XTi (which I used for this review), it becomes MEDIUM wide angle. But thanks to 1.6x crop factor, this lens expands to more usable 35mm equivalent focal length of 27 to 64mm.
Second, audition the lens if you can.
By definition, a walkaround lens should be moderately portable. At 1.1 lbs., Canon's EF 17-40mm f/4L USM is neither super light nor neck breakingly heavy. In fact, it weighs nearly the same as Digital Rebel XTi -- really nice balance. The lens feels very solid with supreme build feature that only L-series lenses offer. Even if this lens is ride out proof and consequently sealed against liquid and dust, I fervently recommend getting a 77mm filter to protect the front lens element. With it, this lens is made to last.
In terms of looks and feel, it doesn't get much better. Its rubberized full-time inner focus manual ring USM focuses smoothly, peacefully, and quickly. Since it's inner focus, the lens will not extend beyond its metal casing whether you zoom in or out. The focus window shows focusing space from 0.28 meter (0.92 feet) to infinity. The focal length marker indicates 17, 20, 24, 28, 35, and 40mm. The lens exudes feature from tip to tip.
You may tolerate heavier lens or may not mind lesser build feature of cheaper lenses. A walkaround lens will be used very often, so make sure you will be comfortable with it.
This lens is well-known for soaked color and deep contrast. Its images are simply stunning. At 17mm wide angle, barrel distortion is noticeable but moderately mild. From 24mm to 40mm, its images are distortion free and perfectly suited at capturing people.
Vignetting (corner darkness) is minimal with mild chroma abberrations (color darkness). At f/4 aperture, fine points become noticeably softer toward the edges. The center region is very sharp and at f/5.6, edges remain fairy sharp. Thanks to 7 diaphragm blades, this lens can yield very nice bokeh at 40mm (blur things).
One of the most cited weaknesses is the f/4 aperture. In my experience, a bump in the ISO speed and steady hands are all you need to take well focused images indoor. On the other hand, if you are shooting with very small amount of light, you might wish for f/2.8 or image stabilizer. Even if the variation linking f/4 and f/2.8 is just 1 stop, my other lens, Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (too heavy to be my walkaround lens) easily outperforms in such challenging situations. But by and large, I was not handicapped by the f/4 aperture.
Some of the main competitions (sorted by price):
- Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro: Excellent zoom range with macro, and generally solid performance if you can get a excellent sample. It does suffer from a bit slow focus mechanism, soft corner, and chroma aberrations. Works only with EF-S mount.
- Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC: Very excellent value for f/2.8 aperture, but Tamron's 17-50mm is a bit better lens by and large. Works only with EF-S mount.
- Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: This "traveler's lens" has a wider focal range than most wide angle lenses (widest among Canon) and is equipped with an image stabilizer. While it is a Jack of many trades, it is the master of none. Every lenses on this list will perform better at particular focal length. Then again, none of the lenses on this list has as wide focal range. It is well-known for extreme barrel distortion at 17mm and chroma aberrations. Works only with EF-S mount.
- Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF): This is the most direct competitor. It takes sharper images with quicker aperture while estimate less. Both the build and focus mechanism are significantly worse, but should be excellent enough for many. Works only with EF-S mount.
- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM: This is THE reference, if you can afford it. Its images have razor sharp fine points and fantastic performance all around (minus vignetting, which is predictable of EF-S lenses). The build feature is worse than L-series but still pretty excellent. Works only with EF-S mount. This is the best EF-S lens hands down.
- Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM: One of the most expensive wide angle zoom lenses. It's larger and heavier, but has f/2.8 aperture.
This is how Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 USM stacks up.
Pros:
- Among the very best build feature.
- Exceptional, sweet smooth, super quick front-focus system.
- Top notch color and contrast. Very sharp center pledge.
- Nearly non-surviving vignetting, generally low distortion, and well controlled chroma abberrations.
- Ideal weight and size for walkaround function
Cons:
- Edge pliability at f/4 aperture.
- Narrower focal length than most competing lenses.
- Slower than some third party lenses.
All in all, this is an exceptional wide angle walkaround lens. It may not offer the most bang for the buck, but if you value full frame compatibility (EF lens mount) and exceptional build feature, this is the default choice. This lens comes with a nice pouch and a lens hood. I find the hood to be somewhat ridiculously shaped and since the lens is strong to flare, I do not use it often when shooting open-air. |
Fantastic walk-around lens!
|
| Review Date: October 22, 2004 |
| Reviewer: JanSobieski, United States of America |
Figuring out which lens to buy turned out to be more hard than which camera to buy! At least for me. I want my lenses to be a reasonable size (rules out the superb 70-200 f2.8 IS L), acceptably quick (at least f 4.0), preferably black (so that they are not easily seen), not disgracefully priced (admittedly this last factor being entirely subjective), and preferably a zoom for the bonus flexibility.
Primes are absolutely fantastic values, reasonably priced, quick, and not easily seen, BUT offer limited flexibility which, in my mind overrides the other factors.
I bought this lens for the wider end of my shooting needs and I couldn't be more satisfied. It takes gorgeous pictures, sharp, perfectly soaked, with no discernable vignetting and small flare under normal circumstances.
This lens has gorgeous bokeh IMO and is every bit the equal, again IMO, of the 16-35 f2.8 L in every accept other than speed (f 2.8 vs f 4.0). With the new digital SLR cameras you can easily make up for the loss of speed by cranking up the ISO.
The construction feature is fantastic and it is a lens that you will be able to use forever. It is an ideal lens for the contemporary crop of 1.6 size sensors, but will also serve you well into the future whether you stick with the contemporary size sensor or go up to larger sensors as they become more afordable.
I heartily recommend this lens. |
Film Users Alert - It's Not Just For Digital SLRs
|
| Review Date: October 14, 2004 |
| Reviewer: Dom Miliano, Denville, NJ USA |
For years, I have been using my 28-70 f:2.8 Canon zoom as my "normal" lens. It is sharp (Oh baby is it!) and at 2.8,quick enough for just about any pro or honest amateur. But there were plenty of times I needed a small more coverage than the 28MM focal length provided. Since most of my work is with long-lens and quick (and expensive) zooms, I couldn't pony up the bucks for Canon's superwide f2.8 zoom. When I saw the price on the 17-40MM lens and the fact that it was the "L" flavor with pro glass, I bought it immediately. I've had it for about a year and I have already sold numerous pictures - published in glossy magazines with picky photo editors. And I trust it to give me sharp pictures, even at the extreme settings - wide open and at the 17MM end. You have to dredge up to always use the weird looking but unassailable lens hood to hegemony flare and as with any very wide lens, look at the edges of the frame (your feet could be in every picture!) It's light, excellent enough to use as your normal lens and with their new 70-300 IS DO lens could make for an incredible and compact travel kit. So while Canon's lens experts doubtless built this one for the on the rise digital crowd, as a film user I reckon it's the bargain of the year and is in my camera bag every time I go on assignment. I suggest that you get a excellent feature "thin" UV filter and polarizer and you will be set to explore the exciting world of ultra-wide photography.
Vital update: I just returned from an assignment to Monte Carlo to test drive sports cars. Part of the deal was to get thrill rides from a pro driver up and down the French mountains above Monaco. Armed with my 17-40MM an EOS 1V, 540 flash, and Velvia 50, I clicked off a whole roll of film during my turn in the passenger's seat. The magazine editor called me when he saw the slides and said that the shots in the car were the "strongest images" in the shoot. Yup, the lens is that excellent. |
Usefulness on the Cheap
|
| Review Date: July 3, 2006 |
| Reviewer: Eugene F. Fama, Pacific Palisades, CA United States |
No one lens accomplishes every photographic objective. Canon makes each lens at every price point well-suited to various tasks, but with limitations that can only be overcome by graduating to the next higher priced but similar item. A case in point: the wide-angle zooms.
The 17-40mm f/4 is one of Canon's best deals in L-series glass. You have to spend twice as much to get a lens of similar feature, but just one stop quicker. Does this make the more-expensive EF 16-35 f/2.8L a ripoff? Not for its own point use: the extra stop gives you the speed to shoot in more indoor situations. Not all photographers need this. When indoors, we're often taking pictures of people, which are better suited to lengths around 50-100mm. To capture sweeping panoramas of parlors for Architectural Digest (or Coldwell Banker) the f/2.8 is the better lens and worth the step up in price, though in many cases you could use the f/4 lens with a tripod. All this means is that the f/2.8 is priced for professional specialists while the f/4 is for more all-function use. My larger point is that Canon has its whole lineup positioned: the differences across lenses are point and appropriately priced, which is excellent news for the consumer. It's hard to make a mix buying homegrown Canon lenses, especially L-series lenses. You just have to figure out which set of two or three suits your range of uses.
The 17-40mm is a steal for people who need a walkaround lens for travel and open-air photography. The shorter focal lengths of the zoom are fantastic on a digital body, with nice reach and minimal distortion; just an ability to grab up landscape and wide situations end-to-end, even when standing close. The focal lengths around 40mm are tight enough for portraits and other local detail. Colors are strong and influential; contrast deep and impactful. The lens itself is small enough and light enough to grab-and-go, but nicely machined, with solid fit and end. It has an straight away recognizable profile, with the added bonus of the red ring.
This lens, plus a 70-200mm f/2.8 telescope and a nice quick fixed lens in the range betwixt are all you need. On vacation, and in most open-air situations, the 17-40mm alone suffices. It makes a excellent first L-lens, and a staple in the arsenal. |
10-22 vs 17-40
|
| Review Date: August 27, 2005 |
| Reviewer: Hans Kim, San Francisco, CA USA |
I traded in my EF-S 10-22 for this one, realizing how often I switched back and forth linking 10-22 and 24-70. I took some stats in fact, and it turns out I stay mostly linking 17-35 range, and never really go any wider than 15-16 even with the 10-22. The wider range of 10-22 certainly gives you a lot of freedom, but I found it to be a bit too reproduction due to the unavoidable barrel distortion.
Now, 10-22 is certainly a solidly built piece of glass, but 17-40 does deserve its L mark and the red ring. It feels a small heavier than the 10-22, and the focus ring turns with sufficient weight (10-22 feels a small on the lighter side) you can really fine-tune the focus with superior correctness. Being an L-series lens, it comes conveniently with a lens pouch and hood.
Under darker conditions, the focus seems a small slower than my other quicker lens, but even at f4, it takes crisp shots. I highly recommend this for anyone with a Canon dSLR. If you're plotting on moving on to the 1:1 crop bodies (1d or 5d, a less expensive sibling coming out in October) 17-40 can be a excellent piece of glass to have, as you're going to have to let to of the 10-22 anyways.
I did have a chance to try the 16-35L, but at the smaller aperture range, the variation seems nominal, especially taking into account the price variation.
I use Canon EOS 20d and Elan 7, and they both pair up nicely with 17-40 4L. |
|
No video reviews found for this product.
