comparing EF17-40mm f/4L and EF 17-55mm f/2.8

[auden09]

a lot of ppl suggest to get 17-55 f2.8 IS,cos very useful when take photo at low light environment.i feel it's quite funny~ even with IS,the object suddenly moving,the photo also become blur~when take nite scene~wit tripod~i dun c wat's de different between f2.8 n f4.recently i take some wedding dinner photo wit my gear,450d+18-200mm+580 exII,i set F8,NO PROBLEM at all.

TS,u can go to some camera shop n try out both lens b4 u decide.dun regret after getting it~enjoy wit ur camera~

f2.8 is pretty unhelpful on a crop body simply because it uses a crop sensor. f2.8 to a 50D is like f4 to a 5DII. sadly...so f2.8 wont really give u any useful advantage like stopping action or shooting flashless at a wedding banquet. to add, IS is only useful on things tt dun move. if you are into shooting museum artifacts or any static object at lowlight, then yeah IS is great. bottomline f2.8 is a no biggie on a crop body, that's in my opinion.

 

[auden09]

Not too sure about that, maybe check the stability of your tripod? Anyway, I've tried own both lens before and kept the 17-40 because of the better build. But you'll need to test out the lens yourself to see which one you like.

same here. i went for the 17-40 cuz i shoot action, candids and group photos. f2.8 at a wedding banquet or in my house just isn't enuff. i need at least 50 f1.4 @ f/2 to be able to stop action. another reason is for the build too. 17-40 juz feels so tight, solid and tough unlike the 17-55 which seems to feel wobbly and creep when pointed down. i realise that for a crop body, when u wanna do lowlight...u need a serious prime. like those at least f/2 or faster. in my opinion u won't really see much of a diff with f/2.8 and f/4 lenses on a crop.

 

[xployd]

yeah. a prime would definitely work better in lowlight (handheld), f/2.8 sometimes wouldnt cut it even. and 17-40L, also in my opinion, does give out better colors. here's an example from two days ago, taken handheld. its in jpg though, its much much sharper when i view it in RAW. (note that its not PPed, except only the standard crop)

and really its all about what u want to do with ur lens. im the kinda person who'll just wrap the camera round my hands, walk and take pictures in less than ideal conditions (rain, dry, hot, cold, snow) so i figure i need the weather sealed plus solidly built lens.

 

[auden09]

i so agree with u.

 

[TheStig]

not quite sure bout the B mode u talkin about. I'm using 1000D, the mode are follow:
A-DEP, M, AV, TV, P so no B mode haha.
use auto focus first, then manually readjust is also wat i did.

B is bulb. Available in M mode. It's like press and hold to keep the shutter open, and release to close the shutter. If you're shooting on a tripod and the pic isnt sharp enough, maybe there's movement when you press the shutter. Get a remote release or use your camera timer. If you wanna use B, you should get the remote release. Even that won't guarantee that there will be no movement. If your tripod isn't firm enough, the wind may cause movement.

Noise isn't caused by lens. It's your camera. Your camera is 1000D, so you should expect some noise even at ISO 400. And 17-55 is a better lens than the 17-40 in terms of... well, everything but build quality I guess, since the 17-40 is an L lens. The 17-55 is sharper, faster, and it also has IS.

If your picture isn't bright enough even at shutter speed of 25 secs, try raising your ISO.

 

[TheStig]

same here. i went for the 17-40 cuz i shoot action, candids and group photos. f2.8 at a wedding banquet or in my house just isn't enuff. i need at least 50 f1.4 @ f/2 to be able to stop action. another reason is for the build too. 17-40 juz feels so tight, solid and tough unlike the 17-55 which seems to feel wobbly and creep when pointed down. i realise that for a crop body, when u wanna do lowlight...u need a serious prime. like those at least f/2 or faster. in my opinion u won't really see much of a diff with f/2.8 and f/4 lenses on a crop.

Hey the 17-55 is sharper than 17-40 lol. But only if you're very anal :bsmilie:

 

[weixing]

Hi,

f2.8 is pretty unhelpful on a crop body simply because it uses a crop sensor. f2.8 to a 50D is like f4 to a 5DII. sadly...so f2.8 wont really give u any useful advantage like stopping action or shooting flashless at a wedding banquet. to add, IS is only useful on things tt dun move. if you are into shooting museum artifacts or any static object at lowlight, then yeah IS is great. bottomline f2.8 is a no biggie on a crop body, that's in my opinion.

Err... f2.8 is still f2.8 whether the lens is use on crop or full frame body because the focal length of the lens remain the same... the only different is the field of view.

Have a nice day.

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

Hi,

Err... f2.8 is still f2.8 whether the lens is use on crop or full frame body because the focal length of the lens remain the same... the only different is the field of view.

Have a nice day.

imho, the focal length maybe the same, but the FF sensor and APS-C sensors are diff, and this hv impact on the dof, that why some say f2.8 hv diff efect on FF and cropped.

 

[sabee]

imho, the focal length maybe the same, but the FF sensor and APS-C sensors are diff, and this hv impact on the dof, that why some say f2.8 hv diff efect on FF and cropped.

However, with regards to shutter speed, which is what the guy was talking about, it should not have any difference should it? Correct me if I'm mistaken but the talk seems to be about 'stopping action' etc.

 

[TheStig]

However, with regards to shutter speed, which is what the guy was talking about, it should not have any difference should it? Correct me if I'm mistaken but the talk seems to be about 'stopping action' etc.

I just realized that too. Stopping action should be a crop camera's advantage, right? Since they're faster than FF in terms of fps? cmiiw

 

[auden09]

erm...we're talking abt lowlight situations like wedding banquets and inside museum. anyway fps has nothing to do in stopping action...it's juz being able to catch more shots in the same span of time. right? FF has better advantage in stopping action cuz 1) it can shoot in ISOs higher than a crop due to the larger sensor. 2) it can gather a lot more light than a crop thus resulting in faster shutter speeds. to freeze motion, the shutter speed has to be fast enough - and to do that u need to compensate with aperture and ISO. in this area, a FF has an advantage because of it's larger sensor. it's able to shoot at a higher ISO. anyway guys, i'm no pro. this is my understanding of this topic thru reading up online and books. yup.

 

[weixing]

Hi,

I just realized that too. Stopping action should be a crop camera's advantage, right? Since they're faster than FF in terms of fps? cmiiw

Stopping action require high shutter speed, so the faster lens can give you the highest shutter speed. High frame rate does help, but you still need high shutter speed. Anyway, not all crop camera got faster frame rate than FF camera... my 450D FPS is 0.4fps slower than 5DMK2... ha ha ha :bsmilie:

Have a nice day.

 

[jdbatino]

What Auden is trying to say is that 2.8 is not gonna cut it anyway for stopping action in low light especially on a crop camera. So might as well just use an F1.4 prime when you go indoors. 2.8 is "faster" on a 5d2 because you can use a higher ISO setting.

For me, I also resort to primes when I am indoors. However, I still like 2.8 option on my standard zoom even when outdoors. Useful for background separation. And 17-40L doesn't have IS. A 17-55 2.8 would be better for shooting stills at night even when stopped down to 5.6.

But hey, if you need both weather sealing and normal wide angle, there isn't much choice right. 17-40L or 16-35L.

 

[TheStig]

erm...we're talking abt lowlight situations like wedding banquets and inside museum. anyway fps has nothing to do in stopping action...it's juz being able to catch more shots in the same span of time. right? FF has better advantage in stopping action cuz 1) it can shoot in ISOs higher than a crop due to the larger sensor. 2) it can gather a lot more light than a crop thus resulting in faster shutter speeds. to freeze motion, the shutter speed has to be fast enough - and to do that u need to compensate with aperture and ISO. in this area, a FF has an advantage because of it's larger sensor. it's able to shoot at a higher ISO. anyway guys, i'm no pro. this is my understanding of this topic thru reading up online and books. yup.

Hehe higher fps helps me in stopping action because I have very shaky hands. Out of 10 pics, there should be 1 that comes out sharper than the rest. Some crop cameras have great noise control too. 7D is awesome haha.

And weixing, I didn't know that 450D is 3.5 fps. I just read the dpreview's review. When I tried my friend's 450D, I thought something was wrong with his memory card hahaha. 500D is 3.4 fps? I didn't know this until today... I thought crop cameras are generally faster than FF cameras.

 

[auden09]

7D is awesome!

 

[clatter8075]

erm...we're talking abt lowlight situations like wedding banquets and inside museum. FF has better advantage in stopping action cuz 2) it can gather a lot more light than a crop thus resulting in faster shutter speeds.

Interesting. Never really considered it. Amount of light is directly controlled by the aperture, right?

So, if I shoot the same subject from the same distance at same focal length and same aperture, shouldn't the exposure be the same?

That is, a shot with a cropped sensor should feel like a cropped version of a shot with a full-frame sensor, no?

 

[Mascaporne]

Interesting. Never really considered it. Amount of light is directly controlled by the aperture, right?

So, if I shoot the same subject from the same distance at same focal length and same aperture, shouldn't the exposure be the same?

That is, a shot with a cropped sensor should feel like a cropped version of a shot with a full-frame sensor, no?

It kinda depends on the algorithm of "correct exposure", i reckon.
Light from the lens is shining into the camera, with the area of a circle.
FF carve out the biggest possible rectangle with a standard aspect ratio, and crop cam carved out another smaller rectangle with 1.6x smaller.

Now, regarding the question, what is a "correct exposure"? Total light? Average light per pixel? I guess unless u work at canon , u will never know what is a "correct exposure".

With that being said, the amt of light that reaches the sensor of FF and crop camera is definitely different ...... and i guess (with a far bit of guesswork) .... the exposure will of course be different rite? Since the camera can only compute the exposure based on light striking the sensor, rather than light coming thru the lens.

 

[clatter8075]

"Exposure" was an ambiguous word to use. I meant to say "capture" or "image".

Putting everything the same: ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, focus, blah blah, will there be any difference in image output? Won't be be just a different crop from the same "image circle"?

I'm asking because of this statement:

f2.8 to a 50D is like f4 to a 5DII

 

[Trapper]

"Exposure" was an ambiguous word to use. I meant to say "capture" or "image".

Putting everything the same: ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focal length, focus, blah blah, will there be any difference in image output? Won't be be just a different crop from the same "image circle"?

I'm asking because of this statement:

If everything is the same, including subject distance, then you are correct; it will just be a different crop. A lot of people misunderstand this because if you frame a shot the same way on a crop body and a FF body, the latter will give you less DOF due to different subject distance and/or focal length.

 

[auden09]

ok anyway let's stick to the topic of 17-40 vs 17-55...