about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
514 981961 Mar 16, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $671.49
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.49
8.87
9.0
ef17-40_4l_1_

Specifications:
A new and affordable L-series ultra-wide-angle zoom lens that's ideal for both film and digital SLRs. Superior optics are assured by the use of three aspherical lens elements, in addition to a Super UD (Ultra-low Dispersion) glass element. Optical coatings are optimized for use with digital cameras. This lens focuses as close as 11 inches (0.28m), and offers both Canon's full-time manual focus and a powerful ring-type USM for fast and silent AF. It has a constant f/4 maximum aperture, and offers the choice of screw-in 77mm filters or a holder in the rear of the lens for up to three gel filters. Finally, it offers weather-resistant construction similar to other high-end L-series lenses.


 


Page:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next
          
JORDI350D
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 7, 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 31
Review Date: Dec 9, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: It is very sharp at all diaphragms (even f4). It is not heavy. Very good quality and the ring zoom is very confortable to use.
Cons:
Lens hood. I prefer that was 17-50. You need other lenses in order to complement the focal range.

I think that it is a very good canon lense. Perfect in all the focal range in 1.6 factor. I know that in full frame has more problems with vignetting.
The lens hood is ridiculous for 1.6 factor. I bougth the EW-83DII lens from other Canon L lense that goes very well.
The lens has (IMHO) only one problem that you must complement with other lenses for up and down.

Jordi



Dec 9, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add JORDI350D to your Buddy List  
kendallkoning
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 90
Review Date: Dec 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excelent normal zoom on 1.6 AND wide angle on full frame. Optical quality, build.
Cons:



Dec 7, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kendallkoning to your Buddy List  
LMCasey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 109
Review Date: Dec 7, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $560.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, Excellent color and contrast. Very reasonable price. Excellent overall performance at all focal lengths and apertures.
Cons:
Lens hood is rediculously big.

I really can't find much to fault with the 17-40. It just does what it's supposed to do. A great lens.

Dec 7, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add LMCasey to your Buddy List  
Shaitan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 2, 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 5
Review Date: Dec 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Built quality, AF extremely fast, sharpness, price (for a L)
Cons:
Not 2.8

Well, I guess that I am not totally objective in this review because I was using the EF-S 18-55 kit lens before.

The pictures are just sharp (not the case with the kit lens) and warm.

However, in low light conditions (e.g., bad weather, poor indoor lighting), this lens shows its limitations (high ISO are quickly required, and the autofocus is also noticeably less precise and fast).

The shift toward the 16-35L is thus an option here ... but the price has to be considered too ...


Dec 5, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Shaitan to your Buddy List  
dhphoto
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 15, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 9400
Review Date: Nov 27, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, small, cheap for what it covers
Cons:
silly pointless lens hood, f4

A great lens.

Not the widest, not the fastest but reliable, sharp and small. Covers 17,20,24,28,35 lens ranges and is excellent at them all (from a couple of stops down).

Not perfect wide open, but still very good.

'people' love to bash this lens, I rely on it nearly every day


Nov 27, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add dhphoto to your Buddy List  
JohnR84740
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 382
Review Date: Nov 26, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: excellent image quality, good contrast, sharp, reasonable price for L glass, nice range
Cons:
slight vignette with filter at wide angle, not 2.8

I have been shooting with this lens for six months now, and have come to appreicate its ability to get the shot in most light. It works well for WA landscapes, interior building shots, and up close candids. Barrel distortion is acceptable for my needs, but is easily correctable in PS.

Nov 26, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add JohnR84740 to your Buddy List  
Stealthfixr
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16
Review Date: Nov 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $649.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Underrated lens--absolute best buy for a WA under $1000 & shares the 77mm filter thread size
Cons:
Not 2.8



Nov 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Stealthfixr to your Buddy List  
tony1989tony
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 29, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Compact and Light - Resistance to flare - Fast USM - sharpness - contrast
Cons:
Lens hood mount grinds away against the body and produces a black powder/dust, so does the 70-200mm F4L hood. Not really L finish quality as per the 400 F5.6 L

The first time I used this was in the studio on a 10d, previewing my first images I knew I was on to a good thing, its the kind of lens that creates images that put a smile on your face, you know the pin sharp results will blow everyone away. It is cheaper that the 16-35 for a few reasons and you can tell, but having said that, in the right hands this could give the F2.8 an even match.

Nov 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tony1989tony to your Buddy List  
FJoe
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 1, 2003
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 13, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Solid Build
Cons:
Optical quality

I had not very high expectations, because it is an ultra wide angle zoom. But CA and corner softness is a bit too high for this price level lens. Even on my 1,6 crop factor.

Nov 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add FJoe to your Buddy List  
tri vo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 31, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 350
Review Date: Nov 13, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $550.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: great pictures right out of the camera!
Cons:
none

This is a great lens. I had some cheaper lenses, but I found that none of them even came close to my 50 1.8 so I never used them. Finally a lens that has great pictures right out of the camera. For those on a budget less than the cost of this lens (like me), if you can make it happen, this lens takes great pictures and I am very happy with it. Its focal length allows you to do so much.

Nov 13, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tri vo to your Buddy List  
MartinM2
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 16
Review Date: Nov 12, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Consistent excellent sharpness, color, contrast at all apertures, all focal lenghths, and across the frame on a cropped camera.
Cons:
F4 aperture is slow for indoors

Bottom line, for this focal length and this aperture, nothing is better.
The lens is very sharp wide open across the frame, and I'm not just saying usable sharp. I have a hard time telling what aperture I shot at if it's not close up where depth of field makes it apparent.

It has that "L" color and contrast. It almost gives your photos a 10% or more boost in saturation without any post processing, and the combination of contrast gives that pop and dimension to your photos.

Build quality is as good as it gets.

USM is as fast as it gets, and FTM focus is very handy.

It's really hard to say anything bad about it other than F4 doesn't make this a low light indoor lens, but that's what primes are for.


Nov 12, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add MartinM2 to your Buddy List  
thatoutdoorguy
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 151
Review Date: Nov 10, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: excellent colors and contrast. smooth operation, typically quick focus.
Cons:
sharpness occasionally disappoints

i originally bought it to allow wide angle shots on my dreb (and now on my 20d). i have been very pleased, and it has become my standard walk around lens.

recently had a chance to use both the 17-40 and the 16-35 on a 1dsII and saw _no_ noticable differences in the images they captured.

one often overlooked bonus is that this lens has a very short minimum focusing distance which allows an interesting perspective (at the 17mm end) and good closeups (at the 40mm end).

overall very pleased. definitely recommended.


Nov 10, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add thatoutdoorguy to your Buddy List  
hubsand
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2075
Review Date: Nov 7, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Nicely made. Not awful optically. Er . . .
Cons:
Relatively expensive. Not very good optically.

The shame of it. Absolutely mediocre - even the price is middling: not too expensive, not too cheap. Not too bad, but certainly far from critically sharp - in fact, grotesquely inadequate for the 1Ds II or 5D unless stopped down to f16. Averagely well controlled CA, moderately sharp centre frame, pretty well distortion corrected, quite perky colour . . . I've nothing but a litany of faint praise for this lens, which is ultimately extremely damning for an L lens of this price.

I've tested three samples, the worst of which was tested here: http://www.16-9/net/lens_tests

The best of them were OK, but frankly not as good as the Sigma 15-30mm I replaced it with. This lens struggles to outperform a healthy 12-24mm, and is hugely embarassed by decent primes in its range - though obviously not Canon's of course (24L and 35L excepted)!


Nov 7, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add hubsand to your Buddy List  
RitterRunkel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 3, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $690.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Build quality, price, fast and silent AF
Cons:
soft corners wide open, f/4

I like it. It's well build and not throughout of plastic! Other L-Lenses also have elements made of plastic. At least the switches. The tube holding the lenses is metal and very solid and feels well in my hand.

You get a lens, which is even protected against dust and it's fast and noiseless. It's worth the money. Sharpness is good, except a little softness in the corners wide open. There also seems to be a few chromatic aberrations sometimes, but they are just slightly visible and marginal. Against the Kit-lens for the 20D, the 18-55 EF-S these aberrations are nothing and not even worth to be mentioned.

Never had problems in 10 months, I would buy it again!


Nov 5, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RitterRunkel to your Buddy List  
Robertdrake
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 171
Review Date: Nov 4, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: $950.00

 
Pros: None
Cons:
Soft focusing

Couldn't get a decent sharp image out of this lens, worse than my sub-$200 lenses. Sent for repair, just try getting any informative communication from Canon when you send your very expensive "L" lenses to them. No replies to voice mail or email. After being a loyal Canon customer for 35 years, I've had enough of them.


Nov 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Robertdrake to your Buddy List  
Robertdrake
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 171
Review Date: Nov 4, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $950.00

 
Pros: Sorry, nothing
Cons:
Soft focusing, notorious for focusing issues

Mine wasn't as sharp as my cheapie sub-$200 lenes. Sent it for Canon to have a look at it, and can't even get them to give me a trmeframe for the repair. Never again!


Nov 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Robertdrake to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
514 981961 Mar 16, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $671.49
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.49
8.87
9.0
ef17-40_4l_1_


Page:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next