17-40vs16-35 for landscapes ? on a 1Ds3 ?

Started Jul 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
KAllen Veteran Member • Posts: 3,882
Re: I agree...

Clint Dunn wrote:

I'm actually quite happy with my 17-40....but then again I pretty much only use it on a tripod at f8-f11. I believe the OP said that he wanted it for landscapes and if that is the case the 17-40 is respectably sharp into the corners at f11....not so much at f4. I actually sold my 16-35mm because at f11 there isn't much difference between the two and I wanted to save the money.

With that said, half the people here who complain about the 17-40 probably aren't even capable of getting the most from it. If you can't get an awesome photo from this lens...you're the problem. Take a quick look at flickr hive mind to see what I am talking about:
http://flickrhivemind.net/Tags/1740mm/Interesting
Yeah...the performance of that lens looks really terrible doesn't it:)

Clint
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60455482@N00/

So what exactly do you have to do with this lens that is different from any other lens?

What don't I know to make it work? unless it's stopped well down for the corners it's poor, stopped well down we get diffraction and at any F stop the distortion is pretty horrible. It's good into the Sun is about the best I can say about it, at 32mm it performs at it's best. I love it and hate it, I use it more than any other lens I have, I still think it should be much better,

Kevin.

 KAllen's gear list:KAllen's gear list
Sony RX1R II Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Canon EOS-1D X Pentax K-1 Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow