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

rebel99 wrote:

i have a 17-40mm f4 and have been enjoying the excellent photos it produce's for a long time. contrary to common nonsense i hear about using this lens on a FF camera, i have used mine on a 40D and have gotten much better result instead of my 5D! from the test results i have read, 17-40 produce's the same IQ as the more expensive 16-35mm f2.8 with exception of one click faster aperture and a lot less in price!

cheerz.

Although I don't recommend 17-40L on APS-C as there are better alternatives in overal performance, my copy of 17-40L is very sharp on my 60D and actually slightly edges out Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS and 24-105L when I tested indoor on a dollar bill or outdoor among three lenses on 60D. But I picked up Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS as it has F2.8 that still sharper at least in center, 'OS' (Sigma version of 'IS') and longer range but also a bit heavier than 17-40L.

Some test shots from 60D with 17-40L before I got Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS.





-- 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