17-40 lense discuntinued?

Started Aug 4, 2011 | Discussions thread
Dan_168 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,237
Re: 17-40 lense discuntinued?

Canon has been very weak in the WA area. It's a time to inject something new that is better and more interesting.

Several years ago that statement was true. But as they say, that was then and this is now. Besides the budget 17-40L, Canon's 16-35 II is as good as any competitor's equivilent and cheaper than several, the 17&24mm TS-Es are among the best optics on the planet. The 14L, 24L and 8-15 fisheye are all outstanding. So where is Canon so far behind in UW segment??? Okay, they don't have an answer to Nikon's amazing 14-24, but that's far from a perfect lens also.

17-40, 16-35 is miles behind the 14-24G. 10-22 is no where near the new sigma 8-16, also the new Sigma 12-24 MK2 seems to be much better than those Canon zoom as well from the very small number of sample pictures I have seen, the 14L II in my personal experience is not as good as the $400 Samyang, the 24L II to my eyes is not as great as Zeiss 21. so my current WA landscape lenses are Samyang 14, TSE 17, Zeiss 21, TSE 24 II, Zeiss 35 F1.4, Zeiss 50 F2 and Zeiss 100. and when I really need a Zoom, I use the 14-24G + 24-70G, I agree, far from perfect, but far better than 17-40/16-35+ 24-70l too.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow