17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
end

drahcirel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #1 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Okay guys.. I need your help and quick! I own an XT with the kit lens.. I know lame.. and 70-200 f/4L and nifty fifty and as of this moment I'm on BHPhotoVideo about to pick up the 5D as an upgrade... but the dilemma is... 17-40? or 24-105? The kit with 24-105 and buying the 17-40 alone are about the same price... so it's not price.. which is better.. for me? I've been shooting and the widest I get with the XT is 18mm.. which is a little less than the 24mm at FF... so.. will I like going even wider? I've played with it and love the effects. I shoot landscape and I shoot portraits.. so will the 17-40 be more beneficial with that? I'm planning on getting a 35L and 85L later down the line, but that's not the problem... it's just... really wide? or an all around lens? Convenience isn't everything to me. I could carry around a bunch of lenses or just shoot with the nifty fifty all day for all I care. Which will do me more justice?

Mar 28, 2008 at 08:06 AM

patrickphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #2 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

The jump from 18 on 1.6 to 24 on ff is quite a bit. Four mm doesn't sound like much, but you will be able to get pretty darn wide! I have been using 5d with 24-105, and got rid of 17-40 for the Tamron. I got it for 200 dollars, and it is a faster, lighter, and SHARPER lens! Anyway, 24-105 is incredible on 5d!

Mar 28, 2008 at 08:15 AM

drahcirel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Hmm.. thank you... but I mean.. comparably.. on the wide end.. the 24 on FF is about the same as 18 on the 1.6 crop (the 24 being a few degrees wider). The question was more like, would I like the super wide more and would it be more useful to me than the 24-105L being an all around lens.

Mar 28, 2008 at 08:21 AM

jcolwell
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I use the 17-40L and 24-105L (and 24-70L) on 30D and 5D bodies. The 24-105L is definitely the best choice for a general purpose walkabout lens. Your your appreciation of the difference between 18mm on an XT and 24mm on a 5D is slightly off: for the 18mm, it's 18 x 1.6 = 28.8mm; and for the 17mm, it's 27.2mm. So, both the 17mm and 18mm on an XT are pretty similar to 28mm on a 5D, and that's very different from 24mm. That's is why so many photographers have both 24mm and 28mm lenses.

Edited by jcolwell on Mar 28, 2008 at 02:02 PM GMT

Edited on Mar 28, 2008 at 10:02 AM

Mar 28, 2008 at 09:58 AM

Santai
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #5 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

If you will go for FF on the 5D, the 24-105 would provide much better general purpose use. The additional wideness of the 24mm compared to ca. 29mm of your current crop combo will also be noticeable. Only you can decide if this is wide enough. However, is you really want to go wide very (!) often, 17-40 might be your way to go, missing out on the longer range.

If time is not of the essence, take some sample shots with both lenses at your local dealer. Eventually you may end up with both lenses though.

Mar 28, 2008 at 09:59 AM

mirageII
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #6 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

24mm on a FF is the equivalent of 15mm on the 1.6 crop body.

Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM

David Collomb
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #7 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I would definitely recommend the 24-105L especially if you are about to upgrade to 5D.

24mm on FF is equivalent of a 15 mm on your crop body so I guess it is wide enough.
Both are f4.
24-105 has IS and you may like to have this extra-tool.
17-40 for portrait, not the best focal length...

I use the 24-105 with a XTi and it is already a great lense and I'd love to use it on a 5D... lucky you!

Mar 28, 2008 at 10:15 AM

Mattbtn
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #8 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I'd get the 24-105 too. I picked one up this week to replace the 17-40mm and aside from the loss of 7mm at the wide end, the lens seems slighly sharper than the 17-40 and works better for me as a walk-around.

On a FF, the 24mm provides a very nice FOV, and I think would work well for landscapes although you may have to do some distortion correction in PS.

Mar 28, 2008 at 10:33 AM

Will Patterson
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #9 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Get both, that's what I did

Mar 28, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Mark Peters
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #10 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I'm curious on your price reference....if B&H is selling the 5d/24-105 kit for the same price as a 5D and 17-40 as seperate components, if you decide to go the 17-40 route then buy the 5d/24-105 kit, sell the lens here on the B/S forum for $900+, buy the 17-40 and pocket the difference.........

Mar 28, 2008 at 12:05 PM

GeorgeK-NJ
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #11 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

The 24-105 in sweet on both the XT and the 5D, but so is the 17-40. I'd get the kit 5d and the 24-105, then pick up a 17-40 later. It's not going anyplace!

Mar 28, 2008 at 12:43 PM

John Mills
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #12 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Just buy the 24-70mm instead.

Mar 28, 2008 at 01:44 PM

Beethoven
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #13 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

The question is whether you find the current 18mm wide enough. Do you find yourself backing up against a wall often to get a shot that you want? Are most of your landscapes shot at 18mm?

If you are primarily doing landscapes, it might be more useful to get the 17-40, as you have the flexibility of the ultra-wide when you need it. The 50/1.8 at f8 is quite sharp, and fills the 40-70mm gap nicely.

Mar 28, 2008 at 06:08 PM

twistedlim
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #14 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

24-105

Mar 28, 2008 at 06:30 PM

Roy Pertchik
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #15 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I'd get the 17-40.

I love to use this set up: 20D w/17-40 & 5D w/70-200 (2.8 IS)

If I need to go wider or longer, I swap the lenses. It's an awesome combo. You could do the same with your xt. I hope to upgrade my 20D to a 40D at some point, but I'll still have the same advantage of one full frame sensor and one crop.

Bring along a 1.4 TC and a fast prime (50 1.4 or 24 1.4, etc.) and you have a world class kit, IMHO

Mar 28, 2008 at 07:44 PM

michael49
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #16 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Mark Peters wrote:
I'm curious on your price reference....if B&H is selling the 5d/24-105 kit for the same price as a 5D and 17-40 as seperate components, if you decide to go the 17-40 route then buy the 5d/24-105 kit, sell the lens here on the B/S forum for $900+, buy the 17-40 and pocket the difference.........

Ditto on this.

If you get the 5D kit your getting the 24-105 for about $650! If you decide you want the 17-40 instead, then sell the 24-105 here.

Mar 28, 2008 at 07:50 PM

khiromu
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #17 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

17mm is really WIDE. And 24mm is wide enough for most situation, but that's just for me.
I would go with 24-105 and if you don't like it, you can trade 24-105 with 17-40, and you will get some $$ in your pocket...

Mar 28, 2008 at 08:10 PM

yauyi
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #18 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

24-105L, if you still find 24mm isn't wide enough on 5D, THEN get the 17-40.

Mar 28, 2008 at 09:28 PM

deadeyedick
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #19 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

24-105 without a doubt.

Mar 28, 2008 at 10:26 PM

Rockies Photo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #20 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Go for the 24-105. I had a 17-40. Just sold it, because I do not shoot 17mm on the 5D. It does not have a use in my bag anymore, since I don't use 1.6x bodies. The 24mm is more than wide enough on the 5D. Unless you shoot crowds in tight spaces or have a thing for the Super Wide spectrum of photography, go for the 24-105. It is a better investment, and is an awesome walk-around lens on the 5D, and works well on crop bodies too.

Mar 28, 2008 at 10:51 PM

craigy
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #21 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

I have used a 5D with 17-40L and it is REALLY wide at the 17 end and still pretty wide at the 40 end. Great if that's what you need.

However, the 24-105L is sold as the 5D "kit" lens for a reason. Killer combination.

Craig.

Mar 28, 2008 at 11:27 PM

bander
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #22 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Can't believe you're losing sleep over this one. Get the 24-105L and be done with it. If you ever find a need for 17mm the decision is already made. I use the 17-40, 24-105 and 100-400 on a 5D, and the 24-105 gets used about 90% of the time.

Mar 28, 2008 at 11:48 PM

slowdad
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #23 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

step up and get both

Mar 29, 2008 at 01:42 AM

drahcirel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #24 · 17-40 or 24-105? ahhhh the decision!

Thanks for all the tips guys. It seems as if you've sold me on the 24-105. 18mm is not wide enough on the crop body and I understand it's like a 28 on a FF. I was just wondering if i should get something super wide. I don't want to not have wide enough. I like to go super wide sometimes, but I've played with both a bunch of times, and I'm guessing the 24-105 might be good enough then. The prices for the kit and 5D with 17-40 are about the same. BH has the kit for $2,899.95 and then alone the 5D is $2,199.95 and 17-40 for $679.00, so the 17-40 combo is a little more. I think I'll go with the 24-105 then. Now the dilemma is actually being able to get it.

Mar 29, 2008 at 03:02 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload end