Canon R5 with canon 14-40 f4 L?

[Sir Anomalous]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

 

[tkbslc]

Assuming you mean 17-40L? yes it works great. Enable DLO and it even autofixes CA, etc.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

If you mean the 17-40 F4L, yes it will, though most people with an opinion would recommend a different option. I had it years ago on a crop DSLR, and it worked very well, but I haven't tried it on full frame or a higher resolution sensor than 8.2MP.

 

[Sir Anomalous]

If you mean the 17-40 F4L, yes it will, though most people with an opinion would recommend a different option. I had it years ago on a crop DSLR, and it worked very well, but I haven't tried it on full frame or a higher resolution sensor than 8.2MP.

I meant the "Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens"

I went ahead and ordered a used one because I saw it had 1 day shipping. I received my refurbished R5 today too. I'll report back on the lens and post some examples for better or worse.

 

[SteveinLouisville]

If you mean the 17-40 F4L, yes it will, though most people with an opinion would recommend a different option. I had it years ago on a crop DSLR, and it worked very well, but I haven't tried it on full frame or a higher resolution sensor than 8.2MP.

I meant the "Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens"

I went ahead and ordered a used one because I saw it had 1 day shipping. I received my refurbished R5 today too. I'll report back on the lens and post some examples for better or worse.

I like mine on my RP.

 

[tkbslc]

If you mean the 17-40 F4L, yes it will, though most people with an opinion would recommend a different option. I had it years ago on a crop DSLR, and it worked very well, but I haven't tried it on full frame or a higher resolution sensor than 8.2MP.

I meant the "Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens"

I went ahead and ordered a used one because I saw it had 1 day shipping. I received my refurbished R5 today too. I'll report back on the lens and post some examples for better or worse.

You will need an adapter.

 

[higheronymous]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

The new 14-35mm is much better.

 

[tkbslc]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

honestly it might be fine. 16x9 vide will crop off the corners compared to stills. Corners are the main weak spot of the lens.

The new 14-35mm is much better.

Also cost 4x as much as a used 17-40

 

[Wing2]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

I have both lens. The 17-40 is a lot more economical, but honestly not as good as the 14-35 in many area

Not only is the 14-35 much sharper with better contrast and less chromatic abberation, its focusing speed is more than two times faster, quieter to operate with better image stabilization, shorter focus distance, higher magnification and slightly bigger zoom ratio.

14mm is obviously a lot wider (20+%) than 17mm

17-40 has 5mm longer reach, but image from 14-35 at 35mm enlarged to 40mm would show more details than the 17-40mm at 40mm on a R5

 

[RicInNJ]

I'd suggest rent and try it for your own needs. I never loved my 17-40, and after I tried it on my R5 I sold it. For me it didn't hold up to the 45 megapixel sensor. But your use sounds very different from mine.

 

[tkbslc]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

I have both lens. The 17-40 is a lot more economical, but honestly not as good as the 14-35 in many area

Not only is the 14-35 much sharper with better contrast and less chromatic abberation, its focusing speed is more than two times faster, quieter to operate with better image stabilization, shorter focus distance, higher magnification and slightly bigger zoom ratio.

14mm is obviously a lot wider (20+%) than 17mm

17-40 has 5mm longer reach, but image from 14-35 at 35mm enlarged to 40mm would show more details than the 17-40mm at 40mm on a R5

This is like someone asking about buying a Honda Civic and then you espouse all the benefits of a new Mercedes S-class. Obviously the 14-35 is better. OP didn't ask about it, though. Many good pictures (and presumably videos) have been taken by the 17-40L.

 

[higheronymous]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

I have both lens. The 17-40 is a lot more economical, but honestly not as good as the 14-35 in many area

Not only is the 14-35 much sharper with better contrast and less chromatic abberation, its focusing speed is more than two times faster, quieter to operate with better image stabilization, shorter focus distance, higher magnification and slightly bigger zoom ratio.

14mm is obviously a lot wider (20+%) than 17mm

17-40 has 5mm longer reach, but image from 14-35 at 35mm enlarged to 40mm would show more details than the 17-40mm at 40mm on a R5

This is like someone asking about buying a Honda Civic and then you espouse all the benefits of a new Mercedes S-class. Obviously the 14-35 is better. OP didn't ask about it, though. Many good pictures (and presumably videos) have been taken by the 17-40L.

Realistically he'd be better off having the 14-35mm on an R5 and putting the 17-40 on an RP. Then your analogy would make sense.

 

[Wing2]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

I have both lens. The 17-40 is a lot more economical, but honestly not as good as the 14-35 in many area

Not only is the 14-35 much sharper with better contrast and less chromatic abberation, its focusing speed is more than two times faster, quieter to operate with better image stabilization, shorter focus distance, higher magnification and slightly bigger zoom ratio.

14mm is obviously a lot wider (20+%) than 17mm

17-40 has 5mm longer reach, but image from 14-35 at 35mm enlarged to 40mm would show more details than the 17-40mm at 40mm on a R5

This is like someone asking about buying a Honda Civic and then you espouse all the benefits of a new Mercedes S-class. Obviously the 14-35 is better. OP didn't ask about it, though. Many good pictures (and presumably videos) have been taken by the 17-40L.

OP seem to assume the 17-40 is only softer at the corners. Another poster has mentioned 14-35 is much better but did not say in what ways it is better.

Just want to make sure he is aware of the difference.

In my opinion, 17-40 is not a good match for R5.

If price was the concern, I would recommend a used EF 16-35 f4

Unfortunately, there are not many good and economical choices out there.

RF14-35 at 1699

RF15-35 2.8 is even more expensive

Sigma 14-24 2.8 at 1299 is quite expensive for a third party lens with much narrower zoom range and no IS (a lot heavier and bulkier also)

 

[tkbslc]

Its an older EF lens and soft in the corners I know. But will it work with an R5?

I shoot video and wide angles when traveling and sight seeing.

The 17-40L might be ok for 4k and lower resolution video, but it will be pretty soft on the R5 for photography or 8k video.

I have both lens. The 17-40 is a lot more economical, but honestly not as good as the 14-35 in many area

Not only is the 14-35 much sharper with better contrast and less chromatic abberation, its focusing speed is more than two times faster, quieter to operate with better image stabilization, shorter focus distance, higher magnification and slightly bigger zoom ratio.

14mm is obviously a lot wider (20+%) than 17mm

17-40 has 5mm longer reach, but image from 14-35 at 35mm enlarged to 40mm would show more details than the 17-40mm at 40mm on a R5

This is like someone asking about buying a Honda Civic and then you espouse all the benefits of a new Mercedes S-class. Obviously the 14-35 is better. OP didn't ask about it, though. Many good pictures (and presumably videos) have been taken by the 17-40L.

OP seem to assume the 17-40 is only softer at the corners. Another poster has mentioned 14-35 is much better but did not say in what ways it is better.

Just want to make sure he is aware of the difference.

In my opinion, 17-40 is not a good match for R5.

If price was the concern, I would recommend a used EF 16-35 f4

Unfortunately, there are not many good and economical choices out there.

Tamron 17-35mm f2.8-4

Upcoming RF 16mm f2.8 if you are primarily interested in UWA

 

[Steve Balcombe]

In my opinion, 17-40 is not a good match for R5.

If price was the concern, I would recommend a used EF 16-35 f4

Yep, definitely. And there should be a few more to be had as people replace them with the RF 14-35.

I will eventually replace mine, but it's not for image quality which will probably be about the same, it's for the smaller size and weight, the 14 mm wide end, the closer focusing and more. So lots of benefits but IQ is not one of them.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebalcombe/ or
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/stevebalcombe/popular-interesting/