Canon 17-40mm L f4 or 50mm f1.4????

[dlareg]

Hi,

just recently jump to canon and im not really sure which of this 2 lens (Canon 17-40mm f4 or 50mm f1.4) will work out for me???

Ive already googled it but i want some of your opinions...
Can you give me an advice between this 2...


going for a Portrait wise and like a walkabout out lens... Thanks

:think::think::think:

 

[teodesson]

For me, no clear winner for these 2 lenses.
50mm can do potrait 'better' but less walk around (opposite the 17-40)
If I'm in your position, I'll looking something f2.8
Maybe Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or 24-70 f2.8 (L or Sigma) if your cam is FF?

 

[mimik07]

Hi,

just recently jump to canon and im not really sure which of this 2 lens (Canon 17-40mm f4 or 50mm f1.4) will work out for me???

Ive already googled it but i want some of your opinions...
Can you give me an advice between this 2...


going for a Portrait wise and like a walkabout out lens... Thanks

:think::think::think:

I am currently using both 17-40 and 50 f1.4 on my 5DMkII. So far so good for me. Not sure whether they will work out for you though, because different people have different tolerance levels for lens characteristics.

Some people might probably advise you to go for the Sigma 50 f/1.4 over the Canon equivalent because the latter's AF motor is noisy and tends to break down and focusing in low light condition is slow etc. So far I have used my Canon 50 f/1.4 for both indoor and outdoor portraits. No complaints thus far. Just a sample to share with you.

As for the 17-40, I only use it for landscape shots. Not too sure if its ideal as a walkabout lens due to its lack of reach. Used to have 24-105 as my walkabout lens but later sold it for the 17-40 because I developed a liking for wide angle landscape shots and felt that 24mm wasn't wide enough for me.

Bear in mind that these are just my takes on the 2 lens based on my personal experience and expectations. Opinions may vary between different users. Best to try them out yourself.

HTH and all the best

 

[wdEvA]

well, only you will now which lens suits you better
the 2 lens that you've mentioned are very different.
It's like asking if you should eat apple or orange.

the 17-40L will give you more flexiblity for walkaround
whereas the 50mm would give you more flattering results for normal portraits shot (non-wide angle kind)

though both lenses can be used for walkaround and portraits, it depends on how you are gonna use it, and what you want to achieve.

 

[An drew]

For me, no clear winner for these 2 lenses.

yeah, no clear winner. What do you need it for?

17-40 is not a particularly good walkabout as it lacks range and can't do portraits well.
With a 50 you can at least do portraits.
Also whether you are on crop or FF will also affect your walkaround choice.

 

[dlareg]

Thanks for all the replies...

 

[daredevil123]

TS, this is one of those questions most of us cannot answer. The 2 lenses are so different, each has its uses in different situations. But they are very different. So don't know how to answer this.

But if you are asking which one to buy first, then the simple answer is: how you intend to use each lens? and how many times do you ask your self that you wish you had X lens to capture a particular scene? The X with the most number of times... then buy lens X.

 

[driveanegg]

different focal length, one prime vs one zoom, one $600 vs one $1000, f4 vs f1.4

no one will have the answer except TS. agree with daredevil123, which one do you think you will use more is the one to get. for me, neither, cos 17-40mm duplicates my kit lens in focal length and doesnt improve on max aperture, and the 50mm is too long for most of my indoor uses ...

happy shopping !