Sell EF 17-40 f/4 and get EF-S 17-55 f/2.8?

[Sheiky]

Tough choice if you ask me.


I had to choose between them as well a long time ago: thread


And I must say I was pretty pleased with buying the 17-55. The IS proved to be more of a benefit than I had imagined. However at that time I said I wasn't planning on going full frame, which happened about 2-3 months later [:P] and the weathersealing was not important to me, because my 50D had no use for it. So at that time I chose the 17-55, but my choice nowadays could be different.


Anyway..

The EF-S has potentially better IQ, is a full stop faster, and has IS

Slightly better IQ perhaps, but don't expect too much. The 17-40 has less vignetting by a whisper and the other factors are in favor(just yet) to the 17-55. It does have the f2.8 aperture and IS, which proved very welcome to me at that time. But at that time, I had no lens with IS.

But it's not as rugged, might not hold its value as well, is bigger and heavier, and costs $300 more.

It is...I lost about 200 Euro's (1/4th of new-price) in just 2-3 months. However I don't think the priced drop very hard from that point after. And no it doesn't have weathersealing, which I (now that I've seen the light) believe is an amazing feature.

BUT I am starting to feel limited by its range and max aperture

I'd doubt the 40-55 range would be that much of a change to trade your lens. Especially since you could use your 70-200 for a lot of things you'd mentioned like the portraits. Max aperture however is a thing where the 17-40 definitely has a disadvantage. The f2.8 of the 17-55 combined with the IS is very helpful in lower light situations and also in landscapes with sunsets etc.


Anyway my conclusion is that it remains a hard choice, since the 17-40 isn't such a bad lens. One question remains...do you really need the wider aperture zoom? Can't you use your 50mm for wider aperture shots?


The way I see it is that with the money you can save on selling the 17-40 and buying the 17-55 you could probably almost buy an 85mm 1.8 for instance...


But if the IS and f2.8 is worth the 300 dollars for you, I don't think you'd really regret it. However it's always a good idea to test the 17-55 in a local shop before selling your 17-40 []


Good luck,


Jan

[realityinabox]

I don't see why not. The 17-40 was made to be an ultra wide for full frame users. On a cropped body, it becomes more a general purpose lens, but lacking some of the benefits of the 17-55 ef-s (like IS and 2.8).


So if you don't plan to go full frame any time soon, and if you don't need the weather sealing, I'd say go for it.