Canon wide angle lens question (upgraded from a 40d to a 5DMark3)

Started Feb 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
Marcos Villaroman Veteran Member • Posts: 5,811
Re: Canon wide angle lens question (upgraded from a 40d to a 5DMark3)

I also went 40D w/ 10-22 to 5D2 and 5D3.

Given cost, I went with the 17-40 over the 16-35.

Here's why going 17-40 made sense to me:

1. I don't shoot ultra wide that much and when I do, I usually don't find myself missing f/2.8 on my ultra wide angle lens.  If you aren't using the 16-35 at f/2.8, you loose a lot of the value.

2. The 17-40 uses the same filter sizes as the 10-22 and so I save some money not having to buy new filters.

3. Without the hood (which is the same as the 10-22's), the 17-40 is really small, just a bit bigger than the 10-22 which is nice when I'm trying to fit a bunch of glass in the bag.

4. Stopped down, which is what I'd do on tripods for more DOF, the 17-40 is really good optically.

5. Talking with a number of photographers who own both Nikon and Canon gear, the Canon 16-35 is still not as good as Nikon's.  By the time I find myself yearning for a f/2.8 UWA (aside from my desire to complete my f/2.8 zoom collection), maybe Canon will finally come out with something better.  Granted, that might be after the 100-400 mk II comes out, but, at least the money I saved by going 17-40 went towards getting a 85L sooner.

 Marcos Villaroman's gear list:Marcos Villaroman's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Canon EOS 5D Mark III Fujifilm X-H1 Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +52 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow