Gear Review: Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L

Date April 12, 2008

Canon 17-40

I’d like to introduce you all to Sally. Sally is my 17-40mm wide-angle lens. She is, formally, a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L. But, she goes by Sally.

The technical bits: the “17-40mm” refers to the focal length, “f/4″ refers to the maximum aperture, and “L” stands for “Luxury.” This is part of the professional line of lenses that Canon makes, and it is quickly becoming one of my favorites. Between this one and the telephoto, I feel pretty confident in my ability to get the shot, regardless of the situation.

While in Uganda, I probably shot 80% of the time with this lens. On a crop-sensor body (like my 30D or 40D), this has an effective focal length of about 28mm to 65mm, which is a pretty useful range. On a full-frame body, this would be almost an ultra-wide, but on my bodies, it makes it a great wide-to-medium-range zoom. And, the “L” build quality, which photojournalists and other professionals have come to rely on, is amazing. While not as tank-like as the famous 24-70mm lens, this thing can take a licking and keep on ticking.

For those of you who may not have a good grasp of how focal length affects a shot (in terms of composition, how elements appear in the frame, etc.), I’ve cobbled together this very rudimentary chart, showing the same object (”Ducky”) shot from the same location, at various focal lengths. As you can see, 200mm gets you in very close, but 17mm lets you capture the object and a LOT of it’s surroundings.

Example

The only drawback to this particular lens is the maximum aperture. F/4 isn’t incredibly fast, and it can be a hindrance in low-light situations (evenings, indoors, etc.), but that can be mitigated against by bumping the ISO, or using a tripod (for non-moving subjects). If I ever become a full-time photojournalist, with a paper providing the equipment, I’ll probably look in to getting this bad boy, but for the time being, getting one less stop of light for half-price is a pretty good deal.

Stop by B&H Photo and pick up one of these if you need a champion lens with incredibly image quality, superb construction, and a wider perspective.


See Also:

No Responses to “Gear Review: Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L”

  1. TheChrisBerry said:

    I have a Rebel XT with the 18-55 lens it came with.

    What would you suggest to a beginner looking for a rather affordable lens?

  2. GKB said:

    Chris,
    It all depends on your definition of “affordable.” Before getting the 17-40, I used a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 xD lens, and it produced some incredible images. The image quality made it well worth the $420 price tag, but the rather noisy AF system, and the plastic body made it less than desirable for me. I did love the 2.8 maximum aperture, though.

    One of the things I quickly learned in photography is that you will always spend a ton more on lenses than on bodies. The good thing, though, is that they are more of an investment, and if you treat it right, will keep its value for 10 years or more.

    Let me know your price range, and I’ll see if I can make a recommendation…

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>