17-40 L or 24-105L for landscapes

Started Jan 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
trulandphoto Contributing Member • Posts: 824
Re: 17-40 L or 24-105L for landscapes

Maximus68 wrote:

trulandphoto wrote:


I am thinking of selling the 24-105 and replacing with a 17-40 L get that bit wider on my landscape shots.

Neither lens is a replacement for the other. If you are ONLY going to shoot wide landscapes then, of course, the shorter focal lengths would be useful. If you want to throw in the occasional portrait then not so much.

I added the 17-40 to my 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8s for my 5DII and 1DIII and am glad I did. I wouldn't choose it over either of the other two, however.

This is for Tru- how about 14mm 2.8?

I've never used the 14mm but would love to have one. I wouldn't trade the 17-40 for it though. 17mm is plenty wide on full frame and the 17-40 is a nice 22-52 field of view on the 1.3x crop.

But if anyone wanted to give me one, I wouldn't turn them down.

 trulandphoto's gear list:trulandphoto's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow