Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 19, 2005, 9:39 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 33
Default

I bought this lens, besides shooting landscapes, what other application can I make
use of it on my 350D? Can I shoot portrait with it also?

The lens is sharp!


KyoceraM400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 20, 2005, 1:34 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

You can shoot whatever you please to, nobody is going to say anything.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2006, 3:43 PM   #3
Member
 
vjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 39
Default

Use it for any application where the focal length works. I would agree that landscapes are probably the perfect application, however, many people claim to use this as their walkaround lens. Personally, I have a hard time imagining that, but it just goes to show that many people rely heavily on this lens.
vjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2006, 6:03 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

its a great walkaround general purpose lens.. it can be nice for group sized portraits or full length portraits.. i think once you start using it, you will find that it works nicely in many purposes..

-dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2006, 2:19 PM   #5
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Personally, I use it for landscape as you said and for an indoors lens (with external flash). This is a great focal range for interior shots at parties, houses, clubs etc - assuming you can use an external flash. If you can't then it is too slow. It's also good for street photography - it forces you to get up close and personal. As a all-purpose walk-around I find it a bit too short. But that's just me - I like a little longer zoom.

The lens has very good sharpness so you can get some great 'pop' out of people as long as you're close to them. When you start focusing near infinity on this lens you really lose the 'pop' (same is true of any lens really).
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2006, 10:29 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 10
Default

just curious would you guys consider upgrading the EFS 17-85 to this lens 17-40 /4 L ? (although I'm also leaning towards upgrading my EFS to the 24-70/2.8, one showed up at a store used recently and it's in mint condition, looks like it hasn't even been used at all)

please advise
thank-you
Raymond
rwong2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2006, 8:01 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 239
Default

I got my 17-40L back in October - Before I sold my 20-35 & used it almost all weekend on a trip to North Alabama. It does Really good, & although I bought a Polarizer for it, I see no need to use it - unless I am shooting maybe a waterfall or on the beach(which seldom happens) because on a bright sunny day, it kicks with butt wiht great color! However, there are most instances, where I still prefer my 28-135 IS as my walk around - it's got more reach.

Off subject, & since I cannot change the camera/lens listings below, I Finally sold my 645 today with 4 lenses & a Sunpak 544 flash - for $450.00. What a shame to basically give this camera away. zHowever, This money plus some more saved will go toward either a 20D or whatver replaces it.
Railfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2006, 3:50 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6
Default

I have the 17-85 IS that I have used as a walk around lense. Most of my pictures are landscape and buildings, with a few portraits. Most of my pictues have been at focal lengths less than 70. The 17-85 IS has a very nice focal range, but not good detail. Since I have not been happy with the quality of the 17-85 IS, I bought a Canon 24-70 2.8 L. There were very few times I actually need the IS feature on the 17-85, even in low light. The 2.8 should compensate for the loss of the IS. For the loss of the wider end of the 17-85, I have a Canon 10-22. Yes, this means I might have to carry another lense, depending on what I might be shooting that day, but I prefer the gain in quality to inconvenience. I figure I have only one chance at most photos. I want to be happy with them.
rndrnd is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:47 AM.