17-40 L or Ultrawide

<div>


i'm looking to get a new lens in the wide angle category of some sort soon. i currently have an 18-55 IS fulfilling my wide angle needs. I'm looking to either replace it with the 17-40 L or perhaps a third party ultrawide such as either of the Tokinas (11-16, 12-24) or a Sigma. The 10-22mm is out of my price range. i have a friend (nikon shooter) who enjoys his Tokina 12-24 a lot, i own a Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 and love it, so i have no problems with a third party lens. My question is more along the line of should i replace the kit lens or expand my focal range?
</div>

17-40 on a crop ain't that wide, not much different from your 18-55 [:)]

If you replace your kit lens with the 17-40, you might be a little disappointed. The L is actually has a little less contrast and less resolution. It was really designed to be used on full frame, where it blows the kit lens away.


I think you will really enjoy ultra-wide angle, so I recommend getting that Tokina 11-16.


If you would rather replace the kit lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 more than the 17-40.

Replace the kit lens, the 18-55 to me is/was garbage (sorry for the harsh words)- 'ok' for budget glass, but found it lacking. Sold it on craigslist.


I have the Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 EX lens and though it is great and focuses very fast via HSM, I would spend the money on the Tokina only because of the 2.8 aperature. A very good friend of mine has the Tokina 11-16 and swears by it, however as with the Sigma, you may not be able to fully utilize the lens on a FF body if you decide to go that route in the future.


I've read that the 17-40 L does have its issues with QC, but you get the same from Sigma and other manufactures but more so with the 17-40 L.





Hope this helps.

On a crop, the 10-22 IMO.


For FF.. 16-35 or 17-40L are both great options. If not, I've also seen great reviews on the Sigma/Tokina lens...

I have personal experience with the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 on a 50D--and it was terrible. In fact, the first copy missed focus so badly that I returned it and got a second copy. Unfortunately, it performed just as poorly. I returned the second Tokina and got a Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5--and it's been fantastic.


I realize the Canon may be out of your price range at the moment, but you might want to consider putting off the purchase just a little while longer until you have the extra money to get it.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2583/...caaa73d44e.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3425/...b50321b357.jpg

Sean, oh why oh why do you make me envy your strobism so?


BTW, my PWs arrived in the mail today! Already updated the firmware, tinkered around with a few shots, but now I wish I had set up some time for a proper shoot.... Baby steps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wickerprints

Sean, oh why oh why do you make me envy your strobism so?

---

Sounds to me like you'll be there soon enough. ;-) Check out my latest maternity series here if you haven't already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sean Setters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wickerprints

Sean, oh why oh why do you make me envy your strobism so?

---

Sounds to me like you'll be there soon enough. ;-) Check out my latest maternity series [url="http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=mandie&amp;w=22336705%40N08&amp;m=tags]here[/url] if you haven't already.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

Well, I haven't had much success so far finding the maternity section at B&amp;H? LOL


Actually, this brings up an interesting topic--how to get people to model for you (and of course, to get people who you want to model for you).

Sean, you're doing that wide angle lens some justice!

For FULL Frame body i preferred this 17-40 'L' it is very ENOUGH and very WIDE[:D]