Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · Replacement for 17-40L
  
 
gheller
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Replacement for 17-40L


So, I shoot lots of interiors for realtors and getting pretty sick of Canon's wide angle zooms. My 17-40 is just crappy at the edges.

I don't want to shell out for the 16-35 f/2.8 mkII or the 17 TS.


Any experience with non Canon f/2.8 WA zooms in this focal range?


Thanks for input!

greg



Apr 14, 2013 at 06:06 PM
Vox Sciurorum
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Replacement for 17-40L


You want to shoot at f/2.8 or you want a lens that goes to f/2.8 to shoot stopped down indoors?

I have the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 for Nikon. It should be optically identical. You'll have depth of field problems in the corners, but they're not awful at 16mm f/2.8 in the focus plane. According to photozone.de corner resolution at f/2.8 is about 50% higher than the Canon 17-40 f/4 at f/4, and improves significantly by f/4.



Apr 14, 2013 at 06:15 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Replacement for 17-40L


If you are shooting interiors and don't want to have to correct for perspective 'distortion', you'll need a tilt-shift and the Canon 17 mm gets lots of praise.

If you don't want to have barrel distortion ultrawide, then the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 has lower distortion than the Canon 16-35 Mark II and the Nikon 14-24 and the Zeiss 21 mm. It is very sharp and has a good price.



Apr 14, 2013 at 06:33 PM
alexdi
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Replacement for 17-40L


There's a fair bit of sample variation with the 17-40. Post what you're seeing? The Tokina would solve for this particular issue if your 17-40 is within the norm.


Apr 14, 2013 at 06:34 PM
saneproduction
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Replacement for 17-40L


Tokina 16-28 is what I use, really great lens right up there in IQ with my other lenses. I didn't have the 17 TS-E at the same time as my 16-28 since I sold it to fund my 200, but the low distortion characteristics and high IQ seem somewhat similar. You of course miss shift, but the IQ for a zoom is great.


Apr 14, 2013 at 06:47 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Replacement for 17-40L


gheller wrote:
So, I shoot lots of interiors for realtors and getting pretty sick of Canon's wide angle zooms. My 17-40 is just crappy at the edges.

I don't want to shell out for the 16-35 f/2.8 mkII or the 17 TS.

Any experience with non Canon f/2.8 WA zooms in this focal range?

greg


If you don't want to pay for the 16-35 f/2.8 mkII or the 17 TS, your choices are pretty slim. The old 17-35 2.8L are getting inexpensive but isn't any better than your 17-40L. If you want significant improvement on the edges, you're gonna have to dig a little deeper in the pockets...



Apr 14, 2013 at 07:06 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Replacement for 17-40L


The manual focus Samyang UMC 14mm f/2.8 AS is worth a shot. It's relatively dirt cheap, very sharp, and has simple barrel distortion that's easy to quickly fix in PP. The Zeiss 18/3.5 ZE is very sharp, fairly expensive (but less than a TS-E 17/4L ), but it has moustache distortion that's not so easy to fix. Plug-ins are available, but I don't use them as my 18 ZE is mostly used for scenics, where you don't care so much. The Samyang 14mm cropped to a 17mm FOV has better IQ than both the EF 17-40L and Tokina AT-X Pro 17/3.5 AF; the AT-X is better than the EF at the edges and in the corners. I own or have owned all of the lenses mentioned above.


Apr 14, 2013 at 07:10 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Replacement for 17-40L


gheller wrote:
So, I shoot lots of interiors for realtors and getting pretty sick of Canon's wide angle zooms. My 17-40 is just crappy at the edges.

I don't want to shell out for the 16-35 f/2.8 mkII or the 17 TS.

Any experience with non Canon f/2.8 WA zooms in this focal range?

Thanks for input!

greg


The TS-E 17 is the lens for the job but as you wrote, it's very expensive. The 16-35 f/2.8 II won't give your edges a noticeable improvement..For less money, I would recommend third party lenses like the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 or Samyang 14. I have heard that the Tokina is very flare-prone though. Keep in mind that you won't be able to use filters with them.



Apr 14, 2013 at 07:22 PM
rdcny
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Replacement for 17-40L


If shooting interiors why not do a Pano (you need a tripod) - overlapping frames...the edges of each frame will be cropped out - only the center are of the lens is used...

This approach assumes you have a tripod and can rotate your lens around a nodal point - or close to it...



Apr 14, 2013 at 07:33 PM
gwaww
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Replacement for 17-40L


I shoot a lot of interiors for my business (custom cabinets and furniture) and use the aforementioned Tokina with PTlens software and get great results.


Apr 14, 2013 at 07:42 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



capt don
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Replacement for 17-40L


I can speak from experience. I am a Realtor and have been shooting houses and visual tours for over 35 years. I either use the 5d II with my 17-40, tack sharp lens or my 24mm t&s lens. I always bring both. I've never had a problem with the 17-40, the trick to shooting real estate photos is to use a tripod. All of the agents who complain about not sharp shots from their photographers, say their photographer just came in and had "fancy" equiptment and no tripod. The only lens that i've ever had a problem with soft edges was the 10-22 on my 7d. With the new 24mm II t&s out you can pick up a nice older 24mm t&s for $900 or less and have a quality lens for life.


Apr 14, 2013 at 08:03 PM
sivrajbm
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Replacement for 17-40L


Your 17-40 must be one of the bad ones. My 17-40 is very good in the corners.


Apr 14, 2013 at 08:19 PM
Depp
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Replacement for 17-40L


When I'm being critical about the corners on the 17-40, usually stop down to at least f8.


Apr 15, 2013 at 01:54 AM
lighthawk
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Replacement for 17-40L






If you don't want to pay for the 16-35 f/2.8 mkII or the 17 TS, your choices are pretty slim.

------------------

I picked up a Sigma 12-24 when I got my first DSLR and wanted to shoot remodels. I have shot many a bathroom or kitchen with this lens and tripod with excellent results. With FF the corners do smear but mostly at the margins, on a crop I don't think it would matter much. The lens is only f/4-5.6, but I usually shoot at F11 for DOF, so it doesn't matter. I don't see the advantage of 2.8 unless you are going for snaps.

Many Sigma examples here with 20D, 5D, 7D bodies: http://wrightbuilt.biz/bathrooms/


Apr 15, 2013 at 02:42 AM
gheller
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Replacement for 17-40L


Thanks for all of the great feedback.

Certainly not shooting at f/2.8 for my interiors, just put that out there because I wanted a fixed aperture lense.

As for a tripod and interiors, I shoot with flash (with GF lightsphere), so a tripod wouldn't help.

FWIW, I am on a 5d mkII.

I think I will have a look at the Tokina

Thanks!

greg



Apr 15, 2013 at 05:22 AM
stan23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Replacement for 17-40L


I'd keep an eye out for the 16-35 II on the Canon refurb site - i've seen it for $1200.


Apr 15, 2013 at 08:08 AM
deepbluejh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Replacement for 17-40L


I'm not convinced the Tokina 16-28 is any better than the 17-40, personally. There seems to be less vignetting with both lenses at F4. However at F5.6 they look about even all around with the Canon being a tad sharper in some cases.


Apr 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM
scottam10
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Replacement for 17-40L


The 16-35 II isn't much better than the 17-40 in the corners

- it's better at wide apertures but once you get past f/8 they're pretty similar

I've heard good things about the Tokina 16-28

A tripod always helps sharpness unless you are deliberately choosing a high enough shutter speed and low iso so that you exclude ambient light

- tripods also help with composition and making sure horizons are horizontal



Apr 15, 2013 at 12:57 PM
goosemang
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Replacement for 17-40L


i don't know about a replacement, and this post isn't helpful at all, but i just wanted to say how much i friggin' love the 17-40 L.

only zoom i own.



Apr 15, 2013 at 01:23 PM
bambi73
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Replacement for 17-40L


i am using the tokina 17 3.5 at-x pro and the 24 2.8 for wide angle shots.

i dont know if its better/worse comparing to the 17-40 (but i would like to know, because im thinking about getting one).



Apr 15, 2013 at 01:37 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password