17-40 f4.0L or 17-55 f/2.8

[zmikers]

I know the differences between these two lenses but I'm having a very hard time deciding which one to buy. I own the xti so any thoughts or comments would be a great help. This is what I am thinking about:

17-40 f/4.0L - Pros
Great image quality, colours, saturation etc. One of the best for this length.
Great build quality, being an L
capability to use the lens on a full sensor body.
2 thirds the price of the 17-55 (not a deal breaker)

cons
only f/4.0
no IS
maybe lacking a bit a the long end, only being 40mm (not a huge issue)

17-55 f/2.8 - Pros
Great image quality. On par with the 17-40 (or so I've read)
Very fast and great in low light with f/2.8 throught out the zoom
IS for even better low light sharpness
55mm at the long end rather than 40mm

cons
EFS mount, can not upgrade with a new full sensor body
300 dollars more than the 17-40 (not a deal breaker)
not an L although I've heard it has pretty good build quality

So I know all of the arguements, like first I need to decide what is important to me and choose from that. I have tried and I can't decide. What I am asking here is for anyone with experience with either or both of these lenses to give me some useful feedback. For example, is the f/4.0 of the 17-40 not that noticable of a draw back. Or, is the IS of the 17-55 so important that I should get this lens. Anyway, any help here would be great, thank you.:D

[RichNY]

I know the differences between these two lenses but I'm having a very hard time deciding which one to buy. I own the xti so any thoughts or comments would be a great help. This is what I am thinking about:

17-40 f/4.0L - Pros
Great image quality, colours, saturation etc. One of the best for this length.
Great build quality, being an L
capability to use the lens on a full sensor body.
2 thirds the price of the 17-55 (not a deal breaker)

cons
only f/4.0
no IS
maybe lacking a bit a the long end, only being 40mm (not a huge issue)

17-55 f/2.8 - Pros
Great image quality. On par with the 17-40 (or so I've read)
Very fast and great in low light with f/2.8 throught out the zoom
IS for even better low light sharpness
55mm at the long end rather than 40mm

cons
EFS mount, can not upgrade with a new full sensor body
300 dollars more than the 17-40 (not a deal breaker)
not an L although I've heard it has pretty good build quality

So I know all of the arguements, like first I need to decide what is important to me and choose from that. I have tried and I can't decide. What I am asking here is for anyone with experience with either or both of these lenses to give me some useful feedback. For example, is the f/4.0 of the 17-40 not that noticable of a draw back. Or, is the IS of the 17-55 so important that I should get this lens. Anyway, any help here would be great, thank you.:D

If you want the short answer, buy the 17-55 f/2.8 IS.
You are gaining a full stop which means not having to crank your ISO up as much, IS which does make a difference, and longer focal length. The build quality on this lens is excellent- not a tank like my 70-200 but then again not every lens needs to be built like a brick sh@thouse and be that much heavier.

One day should you go FF then you can just sell the 17-55 and take $100 or so loss on the glass which is a cheap rental. Likewise you'll get the extra money you put out on the glass back when you go to sell it.

Hell, I'd even take a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 over the Canon 17-40. Even without the IS the speed is that important.

[zmikers]

Thanks Rich, you are really pushing me further over the side of the fence to which I was leaning anyway, but now, you shouldn't have mentioned the Tamron. You can't really compare it to the canon 17-55 can you? Please say no!:p

[coldrain]

Thanks Rich, you are really pushing me further over the side of the fence to which I was leaning anyway, but now, you shouldn't have mentioned the Tamron. You can't really compare it to the canon 17-55 can you? Please say no!:p
No, you really can not compare it (except in focal range).
The build quality of the Tamron is not great, and optically it has bigger flaws (a lot of CA problems in the edges, soft edges especially wide open, less contrast).

If you want to consider a 3rd party lens, I'd look at the Sigma 18-50 f2.8mm EX DC Macro. It is optically better than the Tamron, is better built and allows for closer focussing.

[zmikers]

Coldie - thanks for the input. This lens is not HSM, is that right? Do you know how it focuses, especially in low light situations? Sounds like a great alternative, but could you give a quick comparison to the canon 17-55. If I'm considering the Canon 17-55 would the Sigma be a huge degrade? Thanks for the help. I've got three weeks before my trans siberian trip:D I want a new lens to take with me!

[forno]

Thanks Rich, you are really pushing me further over the side of the fence to which I was leaning anyway, but now, you shouldn't have mentioned the Tamron. You can't really compare it to the canon 17-55 can you? Please say no!:p

Having had both at the same time, I would say the IQ of these 2 in perfect conditions is pretty close, but when conditions aint perfect the Canon is way ahead.

[zmikers]

Having had both at the same time, I would say the IQ of these 2 in perfect conditions is pretty close, but when conditions aint perfect the Canon is way ahead.
Forno - Cheers for the input too!:)

[drama]

I am using a Sigma 17-70 DC
Minimum aperture is 4.5 at focal lengths approaching 50mm, while everything stays sharp, so does the background

"Living in this less than perfect world, finding an object of beauty is rare enough, coming across something with the perfect background is a miracle "
drama

Having a constant f2.8 is very useful to throw the backgrounds out of focus

ends rant :D

Please get a constant 2.8

[RichNY]

Coldie - thanks for the input. This lens is not HSM, is that right? Do you know how it focuses, especially in low light situations? Sounds like a great alternative, but could you give a quick comparison to the canon 17-55. If I'm considering the Canon 17-55 would the Sigma be a huge degrade? Thanks for the help. I've got three weeks before my trans siberian trip:D I want a new lens to take with me!

I would definatly take a Canon 10-22 over the 17-55 for that type of trip. Price an issue I'd go with a Tokina 12-24 and the Tamron 17-50 over the Canon 17-55.

I'd also consider buying both the Canon 17-55 and either Canon ultrawide and selling the ultrawide for a $50-$75 or so loss when you return (consider it as a rental) although it will be hard to part with when you look at your pictures.

Enough about the equipment, give us more details on your upcoming trip- it sounds great.

[aparmley]

zmikers what is the primary type of photography you do (or are wanting to use this lens for) that requires this range? The answer to this question will determine which lens you purchase.

I loved my 17-55 IS when I had my Canon gear - do I miss it? nope; not one bit.

[zmikers]

I would definatly take a Canon 10-22 over the 17-55 for that type of trip. Price an issue I'd go with a Tokina 12-24 and the Tamron 17-50 over the Canon 17-55.

I'd also consider buying both the Canon 17-55 and either Canon ultrawide and selling the ultrawide for a $50-$75 or so loss when you return (consider it as a rental) although it will be hard to part with when you look at your pictures.

Enough about the equipment, give us more details on your upcoming trip- it sounds great.

Hmmmmmmm reselling after I return, now that's a great idea.......But I'm a greedy little bugger, I will not get rid of it!:p

Well my trip is starting from hong kong then by train I will be travelling all the way to England and stopping at these locations: Shanghai, Beijing, UB Mongolia, Irkutsk Russia, Lake Baikal, Moscow, St. Petersberg, Riga Latvia, Vilnius Lithuania, Warsaw Poland, Berlin, Hanover, Bruxelles Belgium then London. Should be a great way to spen 6 weeks eh?

By the way thanks everyone for all of the suggestions although I am much more confused now:p I did take a look at the Sigma 18-50 macro lens today, looks alright but I haven't decided on anything yet. Oh ya, as a side note, I purchased a battery grip for my xti!:D

[griptape]

You'll wonder how you ever lived without the battery grip after you use it for a little while. The vertical shutter release is especially hard to live without now that I've been using it.

[nqjudo]

zkmikers - I did a very similar itinerary a little over a decade ago. I'm sure you're going to have a blast. There are probably more stops than you listed (Ulan Bator, etc.). I doubt the trans-Siberian itineraries have changed.

Good luck at some of the border crossings. You'll see what I mean when you get there :D

[zmikers]

zkmikers - I did a very similar itinerary a little over a decade ago. I'm sure you're going to have a blast. There are probably more stops than you listed (Ulan Bator, etc.). I doubt the trans-Siberian itineraries have changed.

Good luck at some of the border crossings. You'll see what I mean when you get there :D

Ya I shortened it as UB, sorry, easier to write that way:p I've read all about it. I hear the train has to stop on the China - Mongolia border and change wheels as the Chinese use different tracks to the rest of the world. Crazy eh?

Anyways, back to the original question. I will do a bit more research here and I wil buy at least one lens before I go in 3 weeks. I'll keep you posted and if you have any more suggestions please let me know.

Here's my question about the battery grip. It holds two canon batteries. If you use it on your camera all of the time. Do you have two extra batterries to use when charging the first two when they run out of juice. Having 4 batteries kind of defeats the purpose of why I bought the grip in the first place.

[forno]

Ya I shortened it as UB, sorry, easier to write that way:p I've read all about it. I hear the train has to stop on the China - Mongolia border and change wheels as the Chinese use different tracks to the rest of the world. Crazy eh?

Anyways, back to the original question. I will do a bit more research here and I wil buy at least one lens before I go in 3 weeks. I'll keep you posted and if you have any more suggestions please let me know.

Here's my question about the battery grip. It holds two canon batteries. If you use it on your camera all of the time. Do you have two extra batterries to use when charging the first two when they run out of juice. Having 4 batteries kind of defeats the purpose of why I bought the grip in the first place.

You can run 1 battery or if you grip came with the AA battery holedr you could always have a set of lithiums on hand for emergencies

[michaelb]

I'd take the 17-55 if you don't mind the price. Great IQ (many say better than the 17-40), IS and IMO a perfect walk-around range.

I wouldn't let the EF-S issue dissuade you - you can sell it on POTN, FM or Ebay with little loss if you decide to upgrade to FF.

I have the Sigma 17-70 and I love it, but I dream of IS as I shoot alot of landscapes (things that don't move) in low light, where IS would come in very handy when I am without a tripod. For me though, at this point, I just can't justify the cost of the 17-55.

[nqjudo]

zmikers - About the grip, I know some people swear by them but I wouldn't bring mine on a trip like you are going to take. It's just another piece to add volume to your pack. As you elude to in your post, it's also an added obstacle in the fun task of power management and in my experience the grip doesn't always simplify things. I think the grip is a fantastic accessory but it should remain just that. It's not necessary to ensure that you have enough power on hand to keep your camera going. Pack as light/low volume as possible. Just my thoughts.

[zmikers]

Michael - thanks for the suggestion. That is exactly what I'm thinking about now. Can I justify the price difference between the canon 17-55 and the sigma 18-50. Unfortunately, this is a qustion that only I can answer for myself.

nqjudo - You're probably right. Thanks for the tip. I always say, "this time around I'm going to pack lighter." Ya right! Never happens, especially with new toys lying around the house.

Forno - See, that's what I was curious about. 1 battery makes sense, and yes it did come with the AA holder, but I will only use that for emergancies.

Again, cheers all!:D

[canonwire]

17-55 IS f/2.8 and don't look back. I just got one, its an awesome lens. If you budget can bare it, you won't have any regret.

[zmikers]

17-55 IS f/2.8 and don't look back. I just got one, its an awesome lens. If you budget can bare it, you won't have any regret.

That's what I'm affraid of.....LOL......Cheers for the suggestion m8:D

[forno]

17-55 IS f/2.8 and don't look back. I just got one, its an awesome lens. If you budget can bare it, you won't have any regret.

^^^ agreed, 10-22 is next for me

[RichNY]

I took my grip with my to Europe and looking back wish I hadn't. Travel as light as possible, 2-3 batteries, a charger, and voltage adapter will be all you really need.

I think you will really regret not taking a 10-22 on this trip. 17mm just isn't that wide on a crop camera. As much as I love the 17-55 I value my 10-22 much more. Europe is wide- just look at it on a map :)

What bag are you planning on taking? I took along a Slingshot 200; today I'd use a Domke F-3x as my bag of choice for a trip like this.

[zmikers]

I took my grip with my to Europe and looking back wish I hadn't. Travel as light as possible, 2-3 batteries, a charger, and voltage adapter will be all you really need.

I think you will really regret not taking a 10-22 on this trip. 17mm just isn't that wide on a crop camera. As much as I love the 17-55 I value my 10-22 much more. Europe is wide- just look at it on a map :)

What bag are you planning on taking? I took along a Slingshot 200; today I'd use a Domke F-3x as my bag of choice for a trip like this.

I posted this on another thread, but I'll recap. As this is a backpacking trip I need something that won't get in the way of my backpack. I did loads of testing with my gear jammed inside many different styles and finally decided on the Lowepro orion belt pack. I can keep my pack on my back and have my camera infront for easy access. On day trips I can use the shoulder strap. Pretty small for everyday use but for this trip it works.

On a side note and sorry for the excitement, but HOLY CRAP, I'm leaving in 2 weeks tomorrow. This has been the most planned out trip of my life, and I have done a lot of travelling, but the planning needed for this one was huge. It's getting close, very close, I can almost taste the Vodka!:D

[zmikers]

Well I finally did it, and I can thank everyone here for your advice. I took your advice and skipped over the 17 or 18 mm (depending on what brand) and bought the 10-20. I went with the sigma 10-20 due to a budget and plus I've heard really good things about the IQ. I am really happy with the AF so far although I've only tested it a few times around my house. Low light AF seems pretty good, but I won't be using it much in low light. The reverse zoom is a bit wierd, but I'm sure I'll get used to that. The shop says I have 1 week to test the IQ and make sure I'm satisfied, if not, they'll replace it. Man is it wide!!!!!!! I'll do some tests tomorrow and post some results.

Anyways, I know I've said it already, but I really truely appreciate everybody's help and suggestions. Thanks to all and thanks to this great forum......AGAIN!

[SpecialK]

[QUOTE]Well I finally did it, and I can thank everyone here for your advice. I took your advice and skipped over the 17 or 18 mm (depending on what brand) and bought the 10-20. ...

Man is it wide!!!!!!!.

[QUOTE]

You can't go too wide :-) I'm sure you will be glad to have it on your trip.

[magnusfl]

if you shoot in not the best of light like many of us do there no question on geting 2.8 over the 4.0 if you can aford it

[nutsnbolts]

Out of curiosity, what trip is this? Can you provide me the link, I'm curios and interested on doing something like this.

On the other hand, to stay on topic, I just purchased the 17-55. No experience with it, quite honestly, but soon enough. I am looking for a wide angle as well and from RichNY experience, (travel Europe, as well), I would definately be disappointed if I can't capture the wide angle when I should have gotten it.

*sigh*.

Now about the Sigma, hmm...let me check on that!

[zmikers]

Out of curiosity, what trip is this? Can you provide me the link, I'm curios and interested on doing something like this.

On the other hand, to stay on topic, I just purchased the 17-55. No experience with it, quite honestly, but soon enough. I am looking for a wide angle as well and from RichNY experience, (travel Europe, as well), I would definately be disappointed if I can't capture the wide angle when I should have gotten it.

*sigh*.

Now about the Sigma, hmm...let me check on that!

Well my trip is starting from hong kong then by train I will be travelling all the way to England and stopping at these locations: Shanghai, Beijing, UB Mongolia, Irkutsk Russia, Lake Baikal, Moscow, St. Petersberg, Riga Latvia, Vilnius Lithuania, Warsaw Poland, Berlin, Hanover, Bruxelles Belgium then London.

[Rooz]

wow...that sounds like some trip Z. have a great time mate. :)

[zmikers]

wow...that sounds like some trip Z. have a great time mate. :)

I will Cheers!:D only 6 days to go now. What a pain trying to plan this one.