 |
|
|
asanduloiu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 377
|
|
Review Date: Jan 2, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, good colours, no distortions
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far...
|
|
|
Well, I finally managed to get it! And after a short period of using it, I can say that I'm happy with this lens. Together with 70-200 f4, I think it is one of the few bargains from Canon, just to keep you "hooked" on. It's really a good tool!!!
|
|
 Jan 2, 2010
|
|
Olivier6
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2010
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 1, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Versatility, build quality, look and feel
|
|
Cons:
|
A little bit soft in the corners, not as stunning sharp as the 70-200 F4.0 L or the 24-70 2.8L
|
|
|
I use the lens with a lot of pleasure. It used the live on my 300D but after the purchase of my 5D Mk2 it is being used as a wide angle solution.
The lens build is superb, and the optical quality is as good as it gets but not, and I repeat not, stunningly sharp! Use the versatility for many nice pictures and you will be happy.
|
|
|
Jan 1, 2010
|
|
ForcedHorse
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 2, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp and very fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not one as of yet
|
|
|
This is my second L lens (first was a 70-200 f/4L) and wow is all I can say. Great walk around lense on a cropped camera like mine.
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2009
|
|
djpapa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 4, 2009
Location: China
Posts: 232
|
|
Review Date: Nov 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
reasonable price for the landscape range so far , good range
|
|
Cons:
|
same problem as 16-35mm L II but not expensive ,
|
|
I use this len almost a year now,before 17-40L i was own Sigma 10-20, 12-24 and canon 16-35L II.
I sold 16-35L II then buy the 17-40L ,because 16-35L anti flare(CA) is not my acceptable range and so expensive .
16-35mmL is the best color contrast in this 4 lens but the price are not reasonable in my thought.
For the landscape shot I'm still waiting the very good one as same as Nikon 14-24mm. hope.... will be release a real good wide angle LENS from CANON soon .
By now I may say this one is the best choice so far after i used those other 3 lens .
17-40L > 16-35mmL II > S 10-20, S 12-24.
some shot in my ablum
http://www.djpapa.me/toold/foto/Pages/BeiHai%E5%8C%97%E6%B5%B7.html
http://www.djpapa.me/toold/foto/Pages/%E8%83%A1%E6%A5%8A%E6%9E%97.html
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2009
|
|
ERoXsDaBox
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 20, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 29
|
|
Review Date: Nov 16, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit on the heavy side
|
|
|
Rented this lens just this past weekend and I'm totally in love with it. I only wish I had purchased this lens before I got my 70-200m lens.
This lens was so much fun to use and my outputs were just amazing. Great in low light at f/4.0. Great color. Like I said it's a bit heavy with my 40D. Can't wait to rent it again. At the same time saving my pennies to buy this baby. Maybe my wife will buy it for me for Xmas.
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2009
|
|
Fr3d
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 28, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 290
|
|
Review Date: Nov 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
small and light, versatile, takes 77mm filters, weather-sealed, relatively inexpensive
|
|
Cons:
|
huge (mostly useless) hood. corners below 20mm are won't sharpen up when stopping down
|
|
|
I bought this lens used for at a very low price. While does not beat my old 24mm f/2.8 prime (distortion, sharpness on 5DII) I can't complain. It comes very close when stopping down. The versatility certainly can't be beat and thats why I find myself using this lens more than the prime. I would recommend this lens to anyone who's looking for a quality super wide angle zoom with an f4 aperature.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2009
|
|
barmaley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 24, 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, rugged weather sealed construction, AF speed, good optical quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I'm using EF 17-40 f/4.0L USM lens for a long time, since the year of 2005.
I'm generally happy with the results and want to share my experience.
I like very good build of this lens, I never hesitate to take it anywhere. It withstanded rainy and humid environments without a single problem. AF speed is exceptionally fast, it seems that focus is nearly instant. It has good sharpness, relatively low distortion and flare. CA is not an issue as I shoot raw and convert with DPP so they are corrected without a trace of sharpness degradation.
The only negative is that it is hard to isolate your subject from the background, but its common for UWA lens
Here is my review with sample images:
http://www.alexsukonkin.com/reviews/Canon-EF17-40f4-L-USM_en.html
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2009
|
|
S4LTM4N
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 19, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Oct 24, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Fast/Quiet/Accurate AF, Build Quality, Feel
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
I bought this lens for wide-angle portraits and events, and so far I am very impressed. My copy is sharp, straight from f/4, and the AF does a good job in low-lights, considering the maximum aperture. At events, the "natural lighting" is usually terrible so I tend to use a flash anyway, so the f/4 max-aperture wasn't a deal-breaker for me. I am very pleased with this lens on my 20D and will probably continue to use it for a long time 
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2009
|
|
nickjohnson
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 15, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 601
|
|
Review Date: Sep 19, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
good range, fine build, good weigh / balance, good IQ, reasonable price.
|
|
Cons:
|
some IQ inconsistency
|
|
|
Common to all reports
This is my attempt to give something back to the forum members who have provided this wonderful resource. I found much here that helped with my lens selection. So over the last 1 to 2 years here is what I used – all on a pair of 5D bodies. (My comments will be subjective and personal. I will try to avoid saying anything that cannot be read in the spec sheets).
17-40 L
24-105 L IS
70-200 f4 L IS
180 L Macro
400 f5.6 L
50 f1.8 mkII
Sigma 50 f2.8 Macro EX
17-40 L
Comment
Overall a really useful focal length range and a joy to handle and use.
Used hand held for gardens, and scenic Used on a tripod for landscape and night shots. Typically used at f8 to f16.
IQ generally very good. A3 prints no problem – A2 with a little extra pp work. Some CA - ease to correct. At wider end – occasionally - some complex distortion that I am unable to correct with CS or DXO.
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2009
|
|
rail
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 6, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sep 15, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
too soon to tell
|
|
Cons:
|
too soon to tell
|
|
|
Just received the lens thirty minutes ago. I was a bit concerned that it would vignette like the 24-105 I used to own (I switched to the 24-70). Yes, it does show vignetting but from the few indoor shots I've taken so far it is less dark in the corners. I got this lens primarily because I'll be making a trip to Asia soon. I have a feeling that this will be a fun lens to shoot with.
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2009
|
|
cdryall
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $650.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lovely colours, great centre sharpness, REAL value for money
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft on the extreme borders with full frame great on APS - H upwards
|
|
|
One of the best value for money lenses in the Canon lineup, great colour and centre sharpness - recommended especially if an APS H or APS C user, on full frame 5D2 edge limitations do show up....
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2009
|
|
Haring
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
good range on full frame body - 17 40
|
|
Cons:
|
slow
|
|
The 17-40 I mostly use it for real estate photography on a 5D. I also use it for aerial pictures although it is a bit heavy for it.
For interior shots it is great because you need not worry about the F/4. It is good at wide 17, however there is distortion as you can see: www.haringphotography.com
Look for the interior pictures. I have tried to eliminate distortion but I couldn’t 100%. It is not as flexible as my 28-70mm L but the latter is not as wide either...:)
|
|
|
Sep 11, 2009
|
|
DocTP1885
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 15, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 26
|
|
Review Date: Aug 16, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent Build. Fast autofocus. Internal focus. Perfect weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
Even though this lens is for landscape, I bought this for close quarter photoshoots. On occasion, I work in tight spots and require something wide. I rarely shoot in low light and if I did, I prefer to mount the camera on a tripod, so the F4 works well for me. I bought a 70-200L F4 few weeks back and was spoiled with the build, speed, quality, and image of the L. The 17-40 is my 2nd L glass and this one is just as amazing. Very fast focus, image is phenomenal and quality is expected from an L. Love the internal focus and hoping they eventually move the 24-70L 2.8 to that direction since that will be my next purchase. My bud was doin a close photoshoot, so I let him borrow my 17-40 and he was blown away with the image quality. Think I got another person hooked on L glass. When you hold the glass, it feels extremely solid, but yet light. zoom is buttery. and USM is very silent. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2009
|
|
eidelman
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Location: South Africa
Posts: 13
|
|
Review Date: Aug 6, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Robust, sharp, good colour and really wide and sharp on a full frame. A delight to use and minimal distortions
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing at this time
|
|
|
I tried this lens on my Canon 1D mark 111, Canon 5D and Canon 5D mk 2. It has given me very satisfying results with sharp images, good colour saturation, sharp and manageable.
Since its main use is landscape I shoot a f8 or higher so dont need the F2,8
I tried the 16 to 35 type 1 (not type 11) and results on full frame were not good at all
Impression: The Canon 17 to 40 f4 L is a well priced, handy and dependable wide angle lens.
|
|
|
Aug 6, 2009
|
|
akilah
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 162
|
|
Review Date: Aug 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good performance on a full-frame sensor.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, really, for what it is.
|
|
|
Like an earlier reviewer I bought this originally for a cropped frame sensor (40D), and was underwhelmed (decent EFS alternatives in that range were not available at the time). It seemed to overexpose a lot, and didn't seem as sharp as I would have liked.
I've since bought a 5DMII, and now this has become a favorite lens. Initially I thought the photos lacked contrast and were not sharp. I think part of this perception was not having the experience with wide-angle photography that this lens allowed, and when I zoom in on previous photos realize this judgement was not justified.
As I worked with the lens, I began getting consistently sharp photos with good contrast and color. As mentioned some work in Photoshop to get the best results will help, but I think this is true of all lenses not this one in particular.
Patience will pay off with this lens, making it an excellent value.
|
|
|
Aug 3, 2009
|
|
bluefox9er
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 361
|
|
Review Date: Aug 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
size,weight,build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing really
|
|
|
don't be mislead by the post before mine, this is a WIDE lens, even if you use it on a x1.3 sensor or a x1.6
the IQ is absloutley nothing to write home about, this is not a lens where you can use images straght out of the camera and will need to post process to get reasonable results.
i do beleive,however, it isn't that great optically and suspect it's 'L' designation comes from it's robust build and construction rather than it's remarkably unremarkable IQ.
|
|
|
Aug 2, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
507
|
952937
|
Nov 18, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
89% of reviewers
|
$672.06
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.52
|
8.87
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
