Two lenses in the cart for the 5D

9designs2

9designs2

9designs2

Soldato
Joined
5 Jan 2003
Posts
3,523
Location
Somewhere in the middle
Getting itchy ordering finger,

Have a 17-40L and a 70-300 IS USM sitting in the cart of an online UK seller.... with postage comes to £860.......

Should complete my lens plans, as I have the 24-105L and Sigma 170-500
The 70-300 seems an easy choice, as general and walk about option, the Sigma is a "special event lens".... ie Airshows and Motorsport etc.

The 17-40L.... read so many reviews and opinions not sure what to expect. Is 17 to 24mm worth the cost......
I do find the extra width from the effective 27.5mm I had with the 18-70 on the D70 quite good.

Is the 20mm prime any good as an alternative wider lens.

Does the 17-40 perform better than the 24-105 over the range of 24-40 ....

I guess it has good resell value ;)

I have to decide tonight, as I want them for the weekend at Duxford airshow !
 
if you already have 24-105, i wouldn't bother with 17-40 atm, since you don't really need it atm.

If I was you I wouldn't even bother with the 70-300. Just go for Canon 100-400mm and you will have 24-400mm range covered.

maybe sell the sigma 170-500 and get 17-40mm.
 
Well I bought the 170-500, at the time I bought the 5D, about a month ago. As I didn't like the 100-400, after I had play with both in the shop.
So it's not an option !!!

Remember I have no crop effect on the sensor , so a 200mm lens is no use to me!


PS
I wouldn't carry a 100-400 around anyway, so doesn't help much !, still "need" the 70-300
 
Last edited:
9designs2 said:
The 17-40L.... read so many reviews and opinions not sure what to expect. Is 17 to 24mm worth the cost......
Click to expand...

Do you yearn for wider angles, I know I do.


9designs2 said:
Does the 17-40 perform better than the 24-105 over the range of 24-40 ....
Click to expand...

If you want the wide angle, it perforrms much better at 17-24....


If you don't really want the wide stuff, I'd leave the 17-40 alone (though I would get one for me ;) )
 
Yep do go for the wider stuff.... Would half expect the 17-40 to live on the camera, as 40mm looks quite useful.
When walking around towns and cities, or landscape stuff, the wide end is needed.
Use to have a sigma 17-35 on my F80 film camera, and have an 18mm prime on my Contax...which sadly can not be used with the adaptors, as it projects to far rewards, and hits the mirror..........I am gutted, main reason fro buying a 5D :mad:
 
9designs2 said:
PS
I wouldn't carry a 100-400 around anyway, so doesn't help much !, still "need" the 70-300
Click to expand...


This strikes me as a little silly. I always carry my lenses everywhere, when I get my 100-400 it would be in my backpack all the time.

Buying a 70-300 is a waste of money, (I have one only cos I cant get a 100-400 :p)
 
the amount of money you spent on lens, I would have bought 24-70 L & 70-200 F2.8 L IS + x1.4 TC!

but it is your choice, have fun with your new toys.
 
I wouldn't use either the 70-300 IS USM or the 100-400 L IS on a 5D. Whilst both are good lenses for crop cameras they don't perform as well on full frame cameras.

You need to remember full frame cameras will really show up any slight issues with your lenses (due to the nature of full frame sensors) so you need to buy very high quality lenses.

Personally, I think that if you want telephoto lenses on a 5D then you have to look at primes such as the 300 f/4 and the 400 f/5.6 or the f/2.8 versions if you are really rich.

You of course could go ahead and use a telephoto zoom but it seems crazy to me to use one of the best sensors in the business with a lens that can't provide the same level of quality.
 
Concorde Rules said:
This strikes me as a little silly. I always carry my lenses everywhere, when I get my 100-400 it would be in my backpack all the time.

Buying a 70-300 is a waste of money, (I have one only cos I cant get a 100-400 :p)
Click to expand...

Well I have a shoulder bag, after I have put the 5D, 24-105, and soon a 17-40 and 70-300 in. Then my Contax RX, with 6 prime CZ T* lenses which are all metal construction, would you like to volunteer to carry it for me, with or without a 100-400/170-500 lens crammed in ;) .... For me either the big lens are a "going to an event and need it lens" then I carry it around.


^^Gord^^ said:
I wouldn't use either the 70-300 IS USM or the 100-400 L IS on a 5D. Whilst both are good lenses for crop cameras they don't perform as well on full frame cameras.

You need to remember full frame cameras will really show up any slight issues with your lenses (due to the nature of full frame sensors) so you need to buy very high quality lenses.

Personally, I think that if you want telephoto lenses on a 5D then you have to look at primes such as the 300 f/4 and the 400 f/5.6 or the f/2.8 versions if you are really rich.

You of course could go ahead and use a telephoto zoom but it seems crazy to me to use one of the best sensors in the business with a lens that can't provide the same level of quality.
Click to expand...

Sorry but to me sounds bit elitist and crazy, when did Canon and others stop making decent zoom lens ??? They have been making such for years for full frame use.... on film !!! which is higher res then any current DSLR sensor.
Did lens quality suddenly drop ???

So at what point will you see a difference on an A3 sized print. Take your top end prime L and the 70-300, stop down to 5.6 or f8 on both, shoot the same pictures, tweak it in PS, print and compare. Could you tell which lens was used ? or does it only show up, when looking in the corners, when the lens has been used wide open, and you zoom in by 300% on screen ?? I've never actualy compared myself, so I'm speculating here.

This is a bit like me telling everyone in the HiFi Forum, not to waste your time buying CD player under about 2K, because your just wasting the potential of what's recorded on it....... which would be a little drastic, even if I personal wouldn't use anything less !!!

If I actually want to max out the potential picture quality, most of my Carl Zeiss Prime lenses will fit with an adaptor on the 5D, but they are all wide and up to 135mm plus an 80-200.... manually focused, with confirmation beep, and aperture priority or manual use only.

For me the blanket recommending of Professional lenses to all is out of context with there use. Like I say a real life lens comparison would make interesting viewing.... What do really get for the extra cost, as surely a lot of the pro stuff has the extra weather proofing and sealing, and not all about the optics.
Some time I will have to do a lens test.....

So if anyone is using anything less then a Full Linn active HiFi system, don't bother turning it on, it's rubbish !! ;) .........ROFL
 
As I said orginally, I'm not saying the zooms are bad, I'm saying that full frame camera shows up imperfections that you may not notice on a crop camera.

As i'm sure you know the edges of the lens aren't as good optically as the centre. A full frame camera is going to be using those edges where a cropped camera would not. This is why it is more important to choose lenses for full frame cameras than it is for cropped cameras.

As for seeing the difference, take a look at the photos in this review....

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml

There is very noticable difference in quality comparing the 100-400 L IS wide open against the 400 L f/5.6 when you look at 100% crops. This difference is still noticable at f/11 (although much less pronouced).
 
Well I'm even more glad I didn't waste my money on 100-400 now! ;) .... I'm sure my Sigma will produce equally soft images for less than half the cost. :p

It does bring a point out made to me by a Pro Photograph who was teach me some 25 years ago. That the difference between a top lens and a consumer one, was about 2 stops.... ie, stop down a consumer lens by 2 stops, and your will have more or less got the same performance of a Pro lens... Like the report shows, you pay the big buck on the Pro stuff to be able to use it wide open. When with a bit of care with the ISO, then stop down and you're not going to notice much missing.
Should keep in mind the 100% viewing size of the 5d image is equal to about a 1.5 meter by 1meter print out ! Correct ?

Now I'm not trying to say the 400 isn't a better lens for sharpness, but as in my example, stop down a consumer lens and print to A3, how noticeable is it....
 
9designs2 said:
Depends what you plan to shoot, but I would say not really.
Click to expand...

Nature would be pretty rare, mostly gigs and events really. If there were any nature shots, they would be during daylight so I could use a X1.4

I'm leaning towards this over the 70-300mm as a friend has one that he would be willing to sell which would take the cost down to cheaper than the 70-300mm IS
 
9designs2 said:
Now I'm not trying to say the 400 isn't a better lens for sharpness, but as in my example, stop down a consumer lens and print to A3, how noticeable is it....
Click to expand...

Sure, if the conditions or the style of photography you do always allows you to stop down your lens, you don't need to crop heavily, and don't need to print bigger than A3 then you will be fine with a Sigma or Canon telephoto zoom but those are fairly rare conditions (especially for me!).
 
starscream said:
Just got a 5D myself and am thinking of getting the 70-200 to go with the 17-40mm and a F/1.4 50mm prime.

Is the 200 enough on a full frame?
Click to expand...

The 70-200 range will work well with full frame cameras but you may find it lacks the reach you need (unless you have media access).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom