17-40L + Full Frame

Hi,

I have this lens and plan on upgrading my 20D to a Canon FF camera in due course.

I would like to find out about the sharpness of the 17-40L on FF, having read contradicting posts on the various forums here. Most of the samples posted although very pretty, are too small to judge this.

Could owners of the 17-40L with FF cameras please tell me if:

1) It is possible to get sharp corners from this lens; and
2) At what FL's and F-stops this is achievable.

I realise I could have posted this in the lens forum, but feel I'd get a better response here.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Here is Canon's official sample image:
http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/eos5d/html/eos5d_sample_4e.html

SKumar said:

Hi,

I have this lens and plan on upgrading my 20D to a Canon FF camera
in due course.

I would like to find out about the sharpness of the 17-40L on FF,
having read contradicting posts on the various forums here. Most of
the samples posted although very pretty, are too small to judge
this.

Could owners of the 17-40L with FF cameras please tell me if:

1) It is possible to get sharp corners from this lens; and

Click to expand...

Yes, it is. (The good news)

SKumar said:

2) At what FL's and F-stops this is achievable.

Click to expand...

All focal lengths. But the bad news is, you need to stop down to f/11 (at least on my copy of the lens) at pretty much all focal lengths.

Some of this is DOF; with a wide angle lens, the corners are often close to the camera and out of the plane of focus. And some of it may be curvature of field, i.e. the plane of focus may not be at infinity at the corners even when the lens is focussed at infinity. But the bottom line is that if you want sharp corners at f/5.6, you need Zeiss or Leitz primes.

SKumar said:

I realise I could have posted this in the lens forum, but feel I'd
get a better response here.

Click to expand...

I agree. There are a lot more people with cropped cameras than FF cameras over there.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

Wow, the corners are better on mine, I would get blurred corners at F4 but not at F8 here

I've tried this lens in a store (brick wall test) and it was soft in the corners even at F11, I guess it was a bad copy, the tamron 17-35 was better at F11 but not perfect.

I have the 5D with the 17-40, it works great and I don't even get vignetting like all these others say is an issue. However I have not used a polorizing filter yet.

I downloaded that sample, and yes the extreme corners are soft at 100%, but I bet you could make a pretty nice print from that at 16x24 and hardly notice. If you cropped it to 16x20, it would matter even less.

Jon Laye said:

Wow, the corners are better on mine, I would get blurred corners at
F4 but not at F8 here

Click to expand...

Thanks, I have seen that infamous image before, and 17-40L does seem to be struggling a bit.

Hi David,

at what FL's and F stops is your copy sharp in the corners.

Cheers.

Thanks for your reply,

I guess this is what I wanted to hear, that sharp corners are achievable with the 17-40L stopped down. My main use for this lens on a FF camera is landscape photography, and so stopping down should not be an issue.

With such UWA lenses, the corners of the pics are out of focus in many landscapes shots.

That's said if you stop down a bit, you can have very sharp corners with the 17-40 L on a 5D.
--
I love the crop factor at the long end, I hate it in the wide range

Hi, I used that combo in Nepal over Xmas and the new year, this is a small selection of what I acheived; - http://www.pbase.com/jcook11 At f11 I had some softness, but not very noticible unless you realy pixel peep. IM a very good combo.

Well, the first thing I noted when I made the move to a larger sensor (actually the 1d mk 2) was that the 17-40 which sat on my 10D all the time, was suddenly too wide and had insufficient reach for me - enter the 24-70L.

If you're only interested in knowing how it performs though, on a recent trip to Oz with the 1ds mk 2, this was one of three lenses in the bag, and it performed supremely. I can't tell you if the corners were sharp or not at 100% on a screen, but I can tell you that when I was viewing the images, nothing was screaming at me (I wasn't analysing the corners at pixel level), nor do I notice anything untoward on the prints that I have on the wall. In some shots, there is noticable light fall off towards the corners, but not in most (I am sure it's there, I just can't notice it with my eyes).

Oh, a final plus: With the additional weight of the 1d series over the 20D, the relative low weight of the 17-40L is very welcome.

I've not used it much on the 1 series, but following the trip to Oz, where it made into the bag last minute as I juggled weight around for flight check in, it'll be on the camera a lot more this summer - especially when I get up into the Alps. I am quite pleased with it.
--
Darran

Hi,

I was in the position you are a few months ago; 20D owner with a 17-40L, wanting a 5D...

I went ahead and got it, and don't regret it at all - it's a great camera, and a great combination with the 17-40. I was horrified by the edges of that "log cabin in the Alps" sample shot that Canon posted, but either I have a particularly good copy of the 17-40, or their photographer had a dud one.

As another poster here has already said, edge softness up to a point will be un-noticeable in even a large print: I can confirm that this is my experience (although I currently only have the ability to print up to borderless A4)

Here's a shot I took using this lens on my 5D at focal length 17mm, f/8 in good light and on a tripod. I shot it in RAW, but converted using the default options in Zoombrowser's camera raw window, so in theory it's exactly as it would be if you shot JPEG in-camera. I've not resized it, so you can assess the edges at 100% magnification (particularly bottom right) and make your own mind up as to whether this lens/body combination meets your needs - I'm very happy with them!



Hope this helps you.
--
Robin L

Hi Jon,

thanks for the post. You have some very nice pictures here. Yes the softness is only visible on the extreme edges. I can also see a tiny amount of vignetting, may I ask if you used a filter, and if so, what sort. Also are the pictures full size, or did you resize slightly.

Thanks.

Jon Cook said:

Hi, I used that combo in Nepal over Xmas and the new year, this is
a small selection of what I acheived; -
http://www.pbase.com/jcook11 At f11 I had some softness, but not
very noticible unless you realy pixel peep. IM a very good combo.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your insight. I foresee that I will probably need to get a wide angle such as the 24-70L when I go FF. It is however great to hear that it can create sharp images on FF.

Hi Robin,

Thanks for sharing your experience, and the sample. I really appreciate it. The sample is pretty impressive. I can see a slight smudging in the extreme corner, but this is still very acceptable @ f/8. Much much better than the Canon 5D log cabin sample.

May I ask if it is possible to get completely sharp corners by stopping down further?

Robin L said:

Hi,

I was in the position you are a few months ago; 20D owner with a
17-40L, wanting a 5D...
I went ahead and got it, and don't regret it at all - it's a great
camera, and a great combination with the 17-40. I was horrified by
the edges of that "log cabin in the Alps" sample shot that Canon
posted, but either I have a particularly good copy of the 17-40, or
their photographer had a dud one.
As another poster here has already said, edge softness up to a
point will be un-noticeable in even a large print: I can confirm
that this is my experience (although I currently only have the
ability to print up to borderless A4)
Here's a shot I took using this lens on my 5D at focal length 17mm,
f/8 in good light and on a tripod. I shot it in RAW, but converted
using the default options in Zoombrowser's camera raw window, so in
theory it's exactly as it would be if you shot JPEG in-camera. I've
not resized it, so you can assess the edges at 100% magnification
(particularly bottom right) and make your own mind up as to whether
this lens/body combination meets your needs - I'm very happy with
them!



Hope this helps you.
--
Robin L

Click to expand...

Hello Skumar,

I have been trained to shoot at f11 and "nail it" all that stuff aside, any wide angle will be a little softer in the corners at larger aperatures. it is safe to say the 5D and canon's L lenses are great performers. I think you won't go wrong with either. Be warned that the sharness doesn't neccessarily improve with higher f numbers. there is a point of diminishing returns. I think the sharpest would be around 11 to 16 but that is just by the seat of my pants. I have not done tests.
Dave

While you do get a tad vignetting (especially if you use a polariser), its not something that worries me and as I shoot RAW only, can be fixed in CS2.

http://www.pbase.com/sheila/canon_1740_f4l_with_5d

Cheers
Sheila

Sheila Smart
Sydney, Australia
http://www.pbase.com/sheila
Canon 5D gallery: http://www.pbase.com/sheila/canon_5d_

Black & White Spider Award 2005 - Photographer of the Year - amateur

All the technique in the world doesn't compensate for the inability to notice - Elliott Erwitt

Hi SKumar,

Here's another shot taken at the same location, this time stopped-down to f/22. On close inspection, it looks a little better at the edges than the f/8 shot, but much softer everywhere else. On balance, I prefer the overall sharpness at f/8, and will put up with the distortion at the extreme corners. I think this lens (or my copy, at least) performs best a f/8 and f/11.



--
Robin L