"Using the 17-40L on a crop camera doesn't have any advantage (image quality wise) over the EF-S 17-55mm or EF-S 15-85mm. "Originally Posted by Squidy
there are a few fantastic EF-S lenses- EF-s 17-55, EF-S 15-85, and EF-S 10-22
those are the 3 I am aware of.
Those 3 EF-s lenses provide as good image quality to their L series counterparts.
Others such as my kit lens 18-55 and 55-250-- get decent pictures, but the image quality is obviously different when compared to L series.
No, not in general, but maybe in some cases. There is quite some spread in IQ among both EF-S lenses and EF lenses regarding IQ - some are really good while some are average/poor. Then there are the EF L lenses that, in general, perform a bit (or two) better. But there are also L lenses that may be outperformed by their corresponding EF-S lenses. E.g. I find the ES-S 10-22 extremely good, and I'm not sure the EF 17-40 L on a FF body would perform better than the EF-S 10-22 on a crop body. Basically the same could be said about the EF-S 17-55/2.8 vs. EF 24-70/2.8 L. But then there's the build quality, the weather sealing and above all the ability to provide an image circle large enough for the FF bodies...
No, the L-series lenses are better in everything but price, size and weight.
Some do, I think the two I mentioned might be the only ones. Most EF-S lenses are more optimized for price
Arnt
Ahhhhh ok, I forked out for a 24-105L after reading some reviewsd and maybe I misread but I understood it to be a big step up in IQ (which was the only reason for upgrading in the first place)
Either way, I'm sure it'd be better than my other lens. Besides, even if it's built better that'd be a bonus (and as someone said, the resell value will be higher)... and I'll be able to use it on FF if I go that route.
Some EF-S lenses are as sharp as L lenses, some aren't. EF lenses designated L are typically very good, but the best EF-S lenses can be sharper than some L lenses.
Doh!
And I was looking at the 17-55, but the L series ended up being way cheaper
Squidy, I picked up the 24-105mm L for a T1i looking for the promised IQ boost (and AF boost). While we did get some sharp shots with it, in many situations I found I got a better image with my EF-S 18-55mm IS kit lens. Perhaps because I got a refurb body/kit and I lucked out on a well calibrated kit lens, but I was nearly always disappointed with the 24-105mm.
I may have got a bad copy of the 24-105mm, as everyone seems to love it, aside from me.
And I must have got an awesome kit lens, because everyone hates it, aside from me. I know the non-IS ones were crap, but *my* IS kit lens is just about as sharp as my primes and 70-300L. It just sucks for low-light, but so will the 24-105mm L.
I'm only repeating this story to point out that not every kits lens is equal, and not every L lens is equal. If the L lens isn't doing it for you, send it back. It's easier than trying to sell it a couple years from now.
I don't seem to have any problem here.
Mark
Well, I bought it off some dude who said it had been calibrated recently, so hopefully it works out well. It's weird though, brand new it's $1540 here but the 17-55 is $1200 (the kit lens it's replacing is roughly $190).
Mind you, I have read the odd article saying it comes across as being soft in some areas so I'll have to wait til it gets here and try it out. If not, I'll meet you at the bar and we can drink our sorrows away
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote