DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

17-40mm f/4L vs 16-35mm f/2.8L

Started Dec 26, 2012 | Questions thread
qianp2k Forum Pro • Posts: 10,350
Re: 17-40mm f/4L vs 16-35mm f/2.8L

First of all, I have to say these two lenses are mainly for FF bodies. You're better to consider EF-S alternative for your 60D - 17-55/2.8 IS, 15-85/3.5-5.6 IS, Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS (that I bought for my 60D), 10-22 UWA.

Now if you're still interest between these two L lenses and might consider to move to FF soon, you choose between these two based on you priority - do you need f2.8, do you care (slight) better IQ at edges/corners, weight/size, price.

I chose 17-40L.  Its IQ is quite good especially you stop down. Canon is due to upgrade both lenses especially 17-40L as Nikon did. Nikon relative new 16-35/4.0 VR IQ beats both Canon lenses at f/4 and it has VR.  Also this 17-40L is pretty sharp on my 60D that actually slightly edge out Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS at f/4.0.  But I used Sigma as it has F2.8, it has'OS' and longer range.

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/7843305573/albums/17-40l



17-40L on 5D2



-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
BAK
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow