Better lens than 17-40

Started Dec 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP peter doncaster Regular Member • Posts: 214
Re: Zeiss 21mm

JackM wrote:

peter doncaster wrote:

JackM wrote:

At my cousin's wedding, he had a great photographer who really seemed like he knew what he was doing, and the results back that up. He was using a 5D3 and a 21mm Zeiss, among other lenses. He described the superiority of the Zeiss over the 17-40L in the corners as "comical".

But, from 17-20 and 22-40 it's infinitely worse! For a zoom I don't think you can do better unless you need the f/2.8, which you might if you want to do night and/or starscape photography.

Hi I am not doing nightscape. so what is a better zoom in your opinion. The Zeiss comes up a lot, I just like the convenience of zooms. But I must try a prime sometime. Hope it does not spoil me too much.

Like I said, "for a zoom I don't think you can do better unless you need the f/2.8". By "the f/2.8" I meant the 16-35mm f/2.8L. But by f/5.6, the 17-40L is just as good. So if you want more than what the 17-40L has to offer, you're going to have to look to primes.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=708&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=100&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

I think this is my favorite shot from my 17-40L, on my old 5D2:

Interesting , the trees are perfectly clear. there very big trees.

 peter doncaster's gear list:peter doncaster's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow