about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
515 995359 Sep 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $670.44
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
      
stimpy59
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 4, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 8, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quaility, razor sharp images. Great contrast and colours.
Cons:
Expensive at 550.00 in UK

Also tested several other lenses on my 20D: Sigma 18-50 f2.8, Tamron 17-35 f2.8 and Canon 20-35 f3.5. Had focus issues with the Sigma and I didn't like the colours produced by this lens. The Tamron produced more pleasing colours but was on the soft side and also caused the 20D to lock up. The 17-35 Canon was was very close to the 20-35 in the centre but too soft and the edges. So, if money is not an issue buy the 17-40. If you can't afford it just yet, wait until you can!

Oct 8, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add stimpy59 to your Buddy List  
agentmckay
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4
Review Date: Oct 6, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $598.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent "L" build quality, quite sharp with nice contrast and color. Can't beat the price for an L lens. Light weight and easy to carry.
Cons:
a little soft at edges when at 17mm otherwise no cons.

I'm very pleased with my first L lens, excellent build quality and great color and contrast. I've not had it long but have taken some shots I really like. For the price you cannot beat it. Two thumbs up!

Oct 6, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add agentmckay to your Buddy List  
DonSnyder
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 28
Review Date: Oct 4, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $525.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: I am amazed with the quality.
Cons:
The push pull.. type of internal mechanism might inhale some dust.. I always use a good flilter.



Oct 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DonSnyder to your Buddy List  
nick3d
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Oct 4, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: "L" build quality, Great Color & Contrast, Perfect Handling, Nearly Flare Free despite being a 77mm WA lens.
Cons:
So-so value. F/4 doesn't do you any favor indoor. Not the sharpest lens you can have for the money.

I didn't have high hope in this lens coz it isn't one of the sharpest lens like most its L brothers. But once I try it I am stunned by its color/contrast/flare resist ability, it does make your shots look good -- isn't that what you want for a landscape lens? Its size/weight are just about right and focus fast make it a very nice walk-around lens on my 20D.

Sure its sharpness isn't really pleasing but this is a WA ZOOM. Value wise this isn't the best deal you have can around town -- but if what you need is stunning landscape result, this is your lens.


Oct 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add nick3d to your Buddy List  
Wren
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 96
Review Date: Oct 4, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Classic "L" build. Good Color/Contrast.
Cons:
Barrel distortion at wide mm. The reason I bought this lens is to shoot WIDE angle. I already own the 24-70L. Wasted my money thinking I could capture architectural shots. F/4 - too slow. Unusuable on lowlight conditions.

I must say.. after reading a lot of raving reviews on this lens, Im very disappointed. This lens is way overrated. I think a lot of first time "L" buyers are smitten because they own an "L". I have other "L" lenses as well, ( 24-70, 70-200 ) but this one did not deliver. I don't know if I got a bad copy, but I just had to return it. I wanted a wide-angle zoom lens but the barrel distortion at 17mm is really bad. I opted for the ef-s 10-22 instead. I paid more money for this ef-s lens, but worth it. The barrel distortion even at 12 or 14 mm is minimal.

Oct 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Wren to your Buddy List  
fcampana
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 30, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $680.00

Pros: Fast focusing. Heavy duty build.
Cons:
Image soft on the edges, especially left edge, at 17mm. Noticeable CA. Barrel distortion at 17mm.

I had high expectations for this lens because of all the great reviews. I was greatly disappointed. I tested two of these lenses and both exhibited softness near the edges of the images. And this is on a Canon Digital Rebel XT/350D (1.6x crop). Bought the sharper of the two lenses and sent it for calibration. After calibration, it's adequate. The left side is still noticeably soft compared to the center and right side.

Sep 30, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add fcampana to your Buddy List  
coffeecan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 28, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $620.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent optic: good color, contrast, and sharpness edge to edge. Build quality is top notch. Gasket protects DSLRs from dust and other nasties. makes a good walk around lens on 1.6 crop cameras, and with full frame opens up a whole new world.
Cons:
Would love for it to be a stop faster, but then I would also love a rocket car and a million dollars. :)

One of the best values in the canon line up. focus is fast and accurate, and it rarely hunts. This is a great range lens for a reduced frame camera covering 27-65mm, but unlike EF-s lenses gives you the flexibility to go to full frame.

Sep 28, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add coffeecan to your Buddy List  
gandhisan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 31
Review Date: Sep 27, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fantastic build quality. Image quality is superb. One of my best lens.
Cons:
F/4 can be slow at times.



Sep 27, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add gandhisan to your Buddy List  
burtonburton
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 5
Review Date: Sep 25, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, quick focus, light
Cons:
-

This is my first EF lens. I was an FD primes fan until recently, but this zoom lens revealed to me what a quality zoom can do. Together with a 350D it is a great combination. As walkaround lens it is a little bit short for me, but I needed a good quality zoomlens which covers 35mm (35mm equivalent).

As people lens it can be great if you find a suitable background. Background blur can be obtained zoomed in only with the lens wide open and your subject really close and the background far away. Pictures are sharp wide open. It's fast AF makes it a pleasure to work with. Highly recommended!


Sep 25, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add burtonburton to your Buddy List  
caveman_lee
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 12, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
Review Date: Sep 25, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp, good color and contrast, light weight
Cons:
the lens hood is nearly useless. Some distortion over the edge, but not series in my 300D.

This is a very decent WA lens given the price. Sharp at F4 and very sharp when stop down. The most pleasing aspects are that the color retention and contract are very good. These make the key differences between it and the kit lens.

Sep 25, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add caveman_lee to your Buddy List  
miguel_radar
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 24, 2005
Location: Portugal
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 24, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: From weight to is razor sharp image, passing by the great price for a L glass,with a solid body weather sealed...
Cons:
The little "vacum clener" made by the inner lens mechanics.

Happy, no im thriling with this lens, sharp and great color saturation... Just a must have lens.

Sep 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add miguel_radar to your Buddy List  
gml1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 414
Review Date: Sep 24, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Amazing sharpness, solor, and contrast
Cons:
Corner softness at 35mm+. Wish it was a 15-40mm.

Before getting the 17-40L, I already had the 10-22mm EF-S and also the 24-70L. The 10-22 did not quite work for me, though. I would only occasionally need a wide angle shot (which, btw, would never be wider than 15mm) and even then I would find myself reluctant to switch to the 10-22 just for a single shot. So, I sold the 10-22 and got the 17-40L.
First impressions of the 17-40L - at 17mm, the sharpness is good corner to corner even at F4; at F8 the sharpness is simply amazing. At 28mm, central sharpness continues to be amazing but corner sharpness starts showing signs of deterioration. At 35mm the situation is still bearable and at 40mm things start falling apart. Central sharpness is still pretty good, though.
Compared to the 10-22 in the 17-22mm range, I find the 17-40L better. The problem with the 10-22mm is not its sharpness but its colors. Its artificially contrasty, the colors look somehow enhanced but at the same time dull, so the image straight out of the camera ends up being kind of flat. The 17-40L has more natural and rich colors and I find the overall image quality to be much better. CA is slightly better controlled in the 10-22mm, though.
Compared to the 24-70L at 24mm, the 17-40L is sharper at the center and slightly softer at the corners. At 40mm, the overall image quality of the 24-70L is better. CA is better controlled on the 17-40L than on the 24-70L.


Sep 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add gml1 to your Buddy List  
javiersaenz
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 18, 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 23, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros:
Cons:

I am very happy,i's another world. This is a lens of Professional Series, and these is mark of QUALITY, not that the SIGMA 18-50 2.8, sigma 24-70 or tamron 28-75.
This is a really angular lens to landscape.
From this moment, i only buy L lens, you pay QUALITY and you don't stay dissapointed if you pay a L lens.
My next lens will be the 70-200 4.0 L, 50mm 1.4 and the 100 2.8 Macro.
These last aren't L lens but have a incredible quality as a L lens.
I recommend, if you have a dSLR, buy great lens, because the body and the lens have to be the best.
Regards from Spain, Javier.


Sep 23, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add javiersaenz to your Buddy List  
Xavier Rival
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 21, 2004
Location: France
Posts: 3976
Review Date: Sep 23, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Wonderful landscape lens. Good optics, sharp, little flare, good colors. Great build quality. Price just right for a great lens, which is not f/2.8. Standard 77mm filters. Appropriate for close-ups.
Cons:
Hood is a little large, but one gets used to that.

I have owned this lens for 15 months, and used it with a 10D. My main interest in this range are landscapes and scenics; the 17-40 performs very well in these areas. I was pleasantly surprised to see that it also delivers some nice close-ups at the minimum focusing distance (28cm). It works also very well as a standard lens for a 1.6x crop camera.
Build quality is great; the size is ok (except the hood is a little large).

Highly recommended!


Sep 23, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Xavier Rival to your Buddy List  
Mike Mahoney
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 5443
Review Date: Sep 11, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: light, fast enough for my uses, not too expensive, well built, reasonably sharp with very little flare.
Cons:
objectionable amounts of CA and barrel distortion, (even with the 1.6 crop), hood is massive.

I am a little dissapointed in the overall image quality as I had expected something a little better having read the reviews.

My first Canon lens after two decades of Nikkors and I'm not overly impressed ... best thing I can find to say is "adequate".

But a good walkabout or everyday lens.


Sep 11, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Mike Mahoney to your Buddy List  
dafrica
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9
Review Date: Sep 1, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: light, sharp, fast focusing, good 'normal' range on my 20d
Cons:
if it had IS or was f/2.8 that would be great! but i like it as it is.

I use this lens as my walkaround lens. It's smaller and lighter than my 28-70 -- much lighter -- so I don't know why anyone would complain about it's size and weight.

I find this lens to be very sharp even wide open and of course stopped down it is excellent. I also had very high expectations, but I wasn't disappointed at all. I've used this lens in all types of situations -- inside/outside/weddings/street/etc. and I think it's quite versatile and the 27.2mm to 64mm range on my 20D is great for my purposes.

Also, I knew this was an f/4 lens when I bought it, so I use my primes for low light situations. That's NOT why I got the 17-40.

Lastly, I am a pixel peeper & ran many tests with this lens after I received it to make sure I had a good copy and I'm happy to say that I guess I got an excellent copy!


Sep 1, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dafrica to your Buddy List  




Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
515 995359 Sep 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $670.44
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