17-40 vs 24 - 105

coldyn8w

coldyn8w

Suspended / Banned
Messages
158
Name
George
Edit My Images
No
I bought a 17-40 with my 350D a couple of years ago and have recently decided that its not fantastic as a walkaround lens. (however it is a great lens)

I just bought the 24-105 which is great and had planned to sell the 17-40 as the 24-105 covers most of the 17-40's focal range.

I currently dont consider the 17-24 advantage that the 17-40 has over the 24-105 to be worth keeping at the moment, what do you guys think?

BUT I am planning on moving to a 5D soon and think the tables turn a little on full frame because that would make that 17mm a lot wider than it is now on my crop frame. (I do want something very wide in the long run)

Anyone know where I could find the comparison of 17mm to 24mm on a full frame body?
 
Keep them both, if you think you'll want to go wide in the future as it will only land up costing you more to replace it later. 24mm really isn't very wide on a crop body it always surprises me the number of people who use that lens as a walk about, but then I'm into landscapes so it's the old different strokes thing.
 
If you're getting a 5D in the near future keep hold of the 17-40. That combination of body and lens is simply fantastic for sooo many areas of photographt. Trust me, you'll regret it if you sell the lens and then get a 5D.
 
I have a 17-40 along with 24-70 which I use with my 1D Mk iiN and 10D. Both are superb lenses and I would not part with either of them.
 
great, thanks guys. I was going to buy something very wide like a 14/15 mm at some point after I got the 5D, but I guess Ill just hold onto the 17-40.

cheers
 
coldyn8w said:
great, thanks guys. I was going to buy something very wide like a 14/15 mm at some point after I got the 5D, but I guess Ill just hold onto the 17-40.

cheers
Click to expand...

17mm is pretty wide on a full frame body, i'm not sure you'll want much beyond that unless you fancy a fisheye for arty effects!
 
yes Ive just been looking around flickr at 5D shots taken at 17mm and they're plenty wide...
 
a1ex2001 said:
24mm really isn't very wide on a crop body it always surprises me the number of people who use that lens as a walk about....
Click to expand...

Because we have the EF10-22 or sigma 12-20 as a wide lens? There's a few times the 24mm isn't wide enough, but then I've usually got the wider lens with me.
 
Byker28i said:
Because we have the EF10-22 or sigma 12-20 as a wide lens? There's a few times the 24mm isn't wide enough, but then I've usually got the wider lens with me.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that you have the wider lens option but to me a walkabout lens is one that can spend virtually all day on you camera while you walk around allowing you to catch all those little moments for example when your on holiday. I simply couldn't do this with a 24-105 but thats just my style of photography I guess I like the wider angle that 17-18mm gives on a crop sensor.

I'm not saying I'm right and everyone else is wrong as in these case there is no right and wrong just what works best for the individual. I'm just surprised at the number of people willing to use the 24-105 when personally if it had to be an L I'd get the 17-40 I'd hate sacrficing the length but it would be the only way that worked for me. If I was on full frame digital or film then the 24-105 would be ideal.
 
Im finding the 24-105 good as a walkaround, but have to admit a may not have bought it if I didnt think it was going to end up on a full frame.
If I ended up staying on crop sensor I would buy a 10-20 to complement it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top