Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

[John27]

hi guys, while in new york last week I popped into B&H and bought myself a Canon 10-22mm lens. I found it to be very useful while I was there. In fact I used it pretty much the whole time I was there, with the exception being while I was on the water taxi, I used my 24-105mm for the IS. Now my question is, I have a 17-40mm lens, and now think I don't need it. Should I move the 17-40mm on or keep it? I don't think I'll be upgrading my camera anytime soon, I think lol.

John

[kolbeinsent]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

I had a 10-22 lens earlier, when I used the 20D and it performed very nice indeed. I would have thought that you could let the 17-40 go, IF you do not have plans for a camera not compatible with the EF-S mount :-)

[colin C]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

If you are staying with a 1.6 crop body, it is an extra lens you don't really need.

Colin

[briansquibb]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

Logic says sell the 10-22.

However have you compared the IQ and do you expect to be shooting much in the 10-17 range now you are back from new York?

The 17-40 will fetch a minimum £350 as a private sale secondhand

[John27]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

Thanks for the replies, I don't see me upgrading my 7d in the foreseeable future, but if I do I'll probably keep the 7d.

Logic says sell the 10-22.

However have you compared the IQ and do you expect to be shooting much in the 10-17 range now you are back from new York?

The 17-40 will fetch a minimum £350 as a private sale secondhand

Brian, I don't really notice any difference in IQ between the lens' if there is any it is minimal, and I have found myself wishing I had something wider on the odd occasion. On the financial side, I paid £600 for it, and wouldn't want to make too big a loss on it. I'll just have to think about it a bit more.

John

[Nathaniel]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

I have a Tamron 17mm-50mm f2.8 lens, and I wonder whether I would have any benefit from changing this lens for the Canon 17mm-40mm. The IQ from the Tamron is excellent and so is the colour renditioin. Yoiur views are appreciated.

Nathaniel

[Woolley]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

Logic says sell the 10-22

Not on a crop body it doesn't. 10-22 performs pretty much the same function on a crop as a 17-40 does on FF.

So, if you think you may trade up to FF, keep the lens, if not it's pretty much superfluous.

Nathaniel, as you know I have the same lens, I don't see any reason to change it.

[briansquibb]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

Not on a crop body it doesn't. 10-22 performs pretty much the same function on a crop as a 17-40 does on FF.

The logic was that he bought it for a specific reason, which is now finished. The 17-40 can be used instead of a kit lens on the crop body

It depends on whether he needs an ultra wide lens or not.

[nigelch]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

As above, I bought a 10-22 with a crop body, with the intention of going FF later. Now I've done just that, I got the 17-40, which is stunning, and you only need that angle of view on one body.
SO, I currently have a 10-22 to get rid of. It is superb, but I don't need it. It is all about crop vs FF and angle of view.

[Nathaniel]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

I don't see any need at the moment to change to a FF body and most probably I will not. So i will not change my Tamron 17-50mm. I find that it is a very good lens at a very good price. I also find that with my crop body, the central images are very sharp- don't know whether it is my mind or my eyes playing tricks.

[George Bear]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

There a law, called The Gödel, Escher and Bear Law. It states if you intend not to buy another camera and sell a spare lens you buy a new camera …

[John27]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

The logic was that he bought it for a specific reason, which is now finished. The 17-40 can be used instead of a kit lens on the crop body

It depends on whether he needs an ultra wide lens or not.

You are right Brian, I did buy the lens because I knew I would need something really wide for new york. Now that I have the 10-22mm, I like the fact I can go as wide as the 17-40mm does on a FF.

As above, I bought a 10-22 with a crop body, with the intention of going FF later. Now I've done just that, I got the 17-40, which is stunning, and you only need that angle of view on one body.
SO, I currently have a 10-22 to get rid of. It is superb, but I don't need it. It is all about crop vs FF and angle of view.

Just a pity we don't have hindsight, we could have done a deal on the lens lol.

There a law, called The Gödel, Escher and Bear Law. It states if you intend not to buy another camera and sell a spare lens you buy a new camera …

That is so true George, so it looks like I will be upgrading in the future lol.

John

[collywobbles]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

Yep; hindsight is always 20/20 vision!!!!

[EOS_Jim]

Re: Canon 17-40mm lens suplus?

I have a 10-22 that I'm considering swapping for a 17-40L With the 5DI the main lens the 10-22 doesn't get much use now.