HELP!! Canon Lens: Wide... Ultra Wide? I'm a novice; is the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens too much for me?
1573072
jessiegirl, OK. To answer your initial question, I don't think the 17-40 f/4L USM is too much lens for you. You'll most definitely appreciate the better build quality and optical performance of this lens though. More importantly, since you already have the kit lens which is I believe a EF-S 18-55mm IS, you're already covering this focal length anyway. The 17-40 f/4 L is optically better than the kit lens but the difference between 17 mm and 18 mm is small. Because your camera has a crop factor of 1.6, 17 mm becomes the full-frame equivalent of 27 mm. This is wide angle, but you could go a lot wider. What you might find more useful is perhaps Canon's EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. This lens used on your Rebel will give you the equivalent of a 16-35mm used on a full-frame camera. In other words, very wide! There are optional 3rd party lenses that could do the same thing; like Tokina's AT-X 124 PRO DX II. This is a 12-24mm f/4, although this lens is temporarily unavailable at the moment. Sigma also has several wide angle lenses that would give you the wide angles you are looking for. Check this page out: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/wide-angle-zoom-lenses Another web site that I've found useful is fredmiranda.com. It's a great web site specializing in reviews of Canon and Nikon cameras, lenses, and forums with tons of customer feedback and experiences. Let me know if you have any other questions. Michael
1771107
Thank you for the information. Especially I decided to purchase 50D with a 28-135mm IS because of the reason you told. It is very attractive offer. Previously, I had thought to purchase a 28-105mm, so the overlapping would be at minimum w/ 100-300mm.IS lenses are unfortunately over my budget. May be later, I can think about them.I think my Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens can be enough For wide angle focal lengths.Thank you again for your suggestions,Merry christmas and happy new year,GO
1397366
No idea about your camera issues but this lens is in fact equivalent of a 24mm lens on a "full frame" (or actual 35mm film) camera. So it's pretty wide. Remember all micro 4/3rd camera lenses are exactly half the focal length of ff camera lenses to achieve the same field of view. So yes.
1041925
28mm is considered a standard wide shot on this camera and it actually works very well. I use it on my Canon EOS-M. When I finally learned how to use it properly, I got some nice shots with it. I could send you sample pictures so you can have an idea of what you'll be shooting.
5670
Yes, but it will end up being approximately a 25-45mm lens with Canon's 1.6 crop factor. If you're looking for an ultra wide, check out the Tokina 11-16 (now replaced with the 11-20) f2.8. It's a great lens
33385
It's still a fisheye lens with curvature! 14mm prime lens is as far out as a wide angle or you are looking at the 16mm to 35 mm 2.8 f stop wide angle lens if you want wide angel variation or go with the 17mm to 40mmm f4 wide angel they are both l Lenses.
1742136
If you want sharper images and faster focusing, you might instead consider getting one of the Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM models. The difference in image quality can be quite a startling. Back (WAY back) when I was looking to upgrade my old telephoto lens, someone gave me excellent advice that the difference between the newer telephotos I was considering was relatively small - too small to agonize over - and that if I really wanted to upgrade, I should just bite the bullet and get the L. One of the best pieces of advice on equipment I ever got. Once I tried the L, I never looked back. The one drawback is that the lens will spoil you forever.
2176757
Planning to but canon 70-200 L but confused now after reading the forums and comments. Which one I should buy ?canon 70-200 F4 L IS USM or f2.8 L USL (Non IS)Pls Suggest
827331
It's a hugh difference; this is a fisheye, 16mm it's a wide lens. try it, its awesome!
537007
Thanks, Tech. Funny that teleconverters are available for so many other size lenses but not this one. I could have lived with a 1.4x. Like you said, I'll have to live with what I've got... until I can pony up $1500+ for Canon's 100-400mm zoom.I guess I'd better plan on having a good number of 8mb and 16mb cards with me and shoot JPEG and RAW so I can seriously crop and/or enlarge the best shots (which will be many if the weather is good). I want some 20" x 30" or 24" x 36" posters from what I'm shooting. A telecoverter would have helped.
1960708
While Doug James answered this correctly, I did look up this lens on Canon Lenses. Normally, this is an f4 to 5.6 lens and is an EFS lens for C size cameras. For extenders the widest f-stop that is acceptable is f 5.6. So when you are at f 4.0 you might be able to use this but it would be very limited. You might want to try Canon extension tubes for magnification. The 25mm seems to do best with this lens. Remember though that infinity focusing is generally lost with extension tubes.
2174721
I have a 20D. The answer is, it depends on what you want to do. The EF 24-70 and the 70-200 both have the "red stripe" and are top-of-the-line, awesome lenses. They rely on big optics with the 77mm objective lens to produce their images. They are great at all times, especiallhy in low light. They are also very heavy and quite expensive. Get them if you are going for absolute, uncompromising photos. Get a tripod or monopod, too, unless you do arm curls in your spare time! If you want excellent photos with less weight and expense, I recommend you get the EF 17-85 IS as your base lens for light weight and convenience. (If you get the "base" 18-55, you will find you quit using it the day you get a newer lens. We have a Digital Rebel that came with that lens, and we never use it. Never. Did I say "Never?" Buy a body or a kit with the 17-85 unless you are going the 24-70 route. The 18-55 only adds about $50 to the camera price, which isn't much compared to the price of the camera bodies, but why waste $50?) For telephoto zoom, the 70-300 IS is an excellent lens, about the same weight and size as the 24-70 but of course much more versatile. Then you will need a wide-angle, and again you have two ways you can go. I have a 10-22 lens that was less costly than Canon's red-stripe wide angles, and I am well-pleased. You get some parallax below a focal length of 12-14, but it's kind of a neat effect if you like it. I hope this helps.
1561300
So now I am wondering just what I am missing with regards to buying this lens for use on a DSLR like the Canon EOS 5D versus the much more expensive "EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM for EOS SLR"???
204307
85mm f/1.8 EF USM is a good choice for portraiture and standard photography, especially if you're shoot'n low light conditions using natural light with the wider aperture. 60mm macro would be fun..May I suggest the Canon EFS 17-85mm f/3-5.5 USM Ultra wide...it has a wide focal range, still wide aperture and GREAT for all photography ($750)...my Canon is always wearing it until I put on a larger 90-300mm lens :)
465322
I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my 7D and got a 5D MKIII. I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my... » Read More I have had both lenses and with a crop sensor I like the 10-22mm better than this one even though it's not L glass. I used to shoot a lot of events and nightlife and wanted that ultra wide look without going completely fisheye and the 10-22 is perfect for that. With a crop sensor the 17-40 won't look as wide as if you had it on a full frame camera. Again it just depends what you are trying to accomplish with the lens but if I had to do it all over again and had another crop sensor cam I would buy the 10-22mm without questioning it. I only traded in my 10-22mm for the 17-40mm when I sold my 7D and got a 5D MKIII. « Show Less
190061
I use a full frame Canon camera so generally, I do not use a wide angle lens for portraits. I prefer a 50mm or 85mm. I'm not sure if you have a crop sensor and if this would work our better for you, though. I would get the fastest lens that I could afford, though. Good luck!
1118682
you will see some distortion at the 18mm range but will disappear in at the 25 to 28mm area- sometimes it is rather a nice special effect, depends on the shot. Make sure it is a Canon IS lens for the stabilization. The zoom has a very nice range but you will loose some speed as compared to a simple wide angle lens. It is a great walk around lens to suit needs of a wide range of situations.