canon 17-40L on canon sl2 or on sony A6300 with metabones adapter

currently using a t2i and want to upgrade. going nuts researching. unable to find any sony lens comparable to the 17-40L. this canon lens is the only one that i use.

finding all kinds of stories about metabones. some good some bad.

the dpreview of the sl2 describes it as an entry level camera for the casual photographer. I consider myself a serious amateur, not a pro.

need help. thanks.

kayaker156 wrote:

the dpreview of the sl2 describes it as an entry level camera for the casual photographer. I consider myself a serious amateur, not a pro.

"Entry level" cameras are fabulous, and I haven't heard anything bad about the SL2. More $$ gets you mostly bigger size and weight, and more sophisticated focusing.  For that you can try the T7i, 77D, or 80D.  Many more $$$$ gets you a bigger sensor. You could help us if you tell us what "advanced" features you think you need.

kayaker156 wrote:

currently using a t2i and want to upgrade. going nuts researching. unable to find any sony lens comparable to the 17-40L. this canon lens is the only one that i use.

finding all kinds of stories about metabones. some good some bad.

the dpreview of the sl2 describes it as an entry level camera for the casual photographer. I consider myself a serious amateur, not a pro.

need help. thanks.

The 17-40 is an ultra wide angle lens when used on full frame cameras... On APS-C it's no longer ultra wide angle, so you get the worst of UWA (mushy corners) at focal lengths much better covered by other lenses, starting with the 17-55 2.8, but also the 18-55, 18-135 and whatever third parties offer.

If you wanted an UWA on APS-C, the 10-18 and 10-22 make more sense.

Sony probably covers these focal lengths, but not at the same price, even without considering the price of the adapter.

photosen wrote:

On APS-C it's no longer ultra wide angle, so you get the worst of UWA (mushy corners)

No you don't.  The corners are cut off.

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Also, if you plan to use Canon lenses then I recommend sticking with a Canon body. The A6300 is a good camera but it lacks things like touch screen ability, swivel screen and some other features that make me eliminate it as a camera I would consider buying.

I could live with most of the negatives of the A6300 but the price of the lenses makes expensive to buy. Generally the lenses are  twice the price of equivalent canon lens.

clark321 wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Also, if you plan to use Canon lenses then I recommend sticking with a Canon body. The A6300 is a good camera but it lacks things like touch screen ability, swivel screen and some other features that make me eliminate it as a camera I would consider buying.

I could live with most of the negatives of the A6300 but the price of the lenses makes expensive to buy. Generally the lenses are twice the price of equivalent canon lens.

I just sold my A7 II and 2 lenses because I couldn’t afford to build the lens system with Sony. The Canon 10-18 and 50 1.8 for $450 got the to make the move. This is $1350 with Sony (on sale).

I'm a T2i owner tempted by the SL2 (and M50). 
Now that you own the SL2 how do you feel it's an upgrade to the T2i? 
Better "live view" a smidgen smaller is there anything else that stands out?
Thanks!

kayaker156 wrote:

thanks for replying Thrilla. it's a done deal-am now the proud owner of an sl2. i see now that i really wanted to hang on to my 17-40. love that lens . the sl2 allows me to do that. doubt if i'll even use 1/2 the bangs and whistles that it has.

just really wanted to go smaller, light and upgrade camera. all accomplished with the sl2.

couple of people put sony in my ear and that's what caused me to go nuts.

I have been using and loving the SL2 even though I have a full 6D rig.

The 17-40 should be fine on the SL2, I have been using the 16-35 F4L on it and it is an awesome combination though limited somewhat in reach.

ThrillaMozilla wrote:

photosen wrote:

On APS-C it's no longer ultra wide angle, so you get the worst of UWA (mushy corners)

No you don't. The corners are cut off.

I was going to say the same, the 16-35F4L Is amazing on the SL2, blows away the kit lens completely. YMMV.

clark321 wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

Also, if you plan to use Canon lenses then I recommend sticking with a Canon body. The A6300 is a good camera but it lacks things like touch screen ability, swivel screen and some other features that make me eliminate it as a camera I would consider buying.

I could live with most of the negatives of the A6300 but the price of the lenses makes expensive to buy. Generally the lenses are twice the price of equivalent canon lens.

Not to mention that you can find the Canon lenses refurbed or used, many more of them around,

keeponkeepingon wrote:

I'm a T2i owner tempted by the SL2 (and M50).
Now that you own the SL2 how do you feel it's an upgrade to the T2i?
Better "live view" a smidgen smaller is there anything else that stands out?
Thanks!

I have the SL2, had the t2i, as well as the 6D.

I would say that the sensor is the main improvement, around a stop better in noise, plus better more manageable noise quality. More megapixels for better resolution.

The live view is great for shooting from the touchscreen, you'll use it more than you think.

stratobill wrote:

keeponkeepingon wrote:

I'm a T2i owner tempted by the SL2 (and M50).
Now that you own the SL2 how do you feel it's an upgrade to the T2i?
Better "live view" a smidgen smaller is there anything else that stands out?
Thanks!

I have the SL2, had the t2i, as well as the 6D.

I would say that the sensor is the main improvement, around a stop better in noise, plus better more manageable noise quality. More megapixels for better resolution.

The live view is great for shooting from the touchscreen, you'll use it more than you think.

Oh I forgot the touchscreen.   Yes I know I'll use that a lot! 
I have an EOS-M and I love canon's touch screen implementation with touch to AF and touch to snap the picture. And on image preview you have pinch to zoom in/out which going between the camera and a smartphone just feels natural.

One thing that is holding me back is that they dropped the feature where you can take a picture while taking a video.  Totally happy snap hanging out with the kids non-pro feature as you'd get a hickcup in the video but I loved being able to get a video and still at the same time using just the one camera. Canon and Sony have both dropped the feature from all their current cameras so the only option is Panasonic  but I'm still not convinced I'd find the smaller sensor acceptable.  Having 4K almost makes up for the lack of the feature but for that I'd have to wait for the SL-3......