I use this glass with Canon EOS 7D devices, and Canon EOS 5 film camera. Genres - architecture and extreme sports (the extreme requires a wide angle when shooting Skateboard and Street-, (and, or), Freeskate-Rollers, as well as BMX)). I was pleased with the working suitability at ALL aperture values. I was lucky - I got a copy without back-front focus. The lack of IS is not critical for stills, but for video I recommend the 24-105L USM. (I filmed football with him FROM HANDS, and everything is

For trips, reportage, the beach, the compartment of the car dropped, the wind blew dust, the rain splashed - everything is nothing to this glass. For reporting, but for this price, then what you need. the lens does not exist and there is no need to find fault with good products, being an inexperienced and illiterate beginner. Everything for which this lens is designed, it works out for all the money it costs.

My first L-lens. You can use it as a standard zoom on a crop camera, taking into account the use of flash. Take a couple of photos of people with a flash in a store and think again - do you need such sharpness? I think this is a clear overkill. Only if group photos are taken on closed apertures. As a standard zoom, I think the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 is a better fit. As a landscape painter - a completely different matter. This is where sharpness is needed. The angle is simply gorgeous, almost…

The most inexpensive wide-angle zoom for a full frame. Made quite high quality, there are no serious distortions inherent in cheap lenses. Light filters should be chosen special, thin. And then there will be strong vignetting from them at a wide angle. The kit comes with a lens hood, which is of no particular use, except that the lens looks cooler with it, but do not go into any bags and backpacks)) Also included is a very cool case, I carry every little thing in it when traveling :)

I chose between 17-40 and 16-35. I chose 17-40, because. I didn’t want to overpay 20,000 for aperture ratio. I bought a tripod for night shooting and do not experience any inconvenience. Moreover, the diameter for a 77 mm light filter is more common and it is easier to get filters than for 82 mm. I advise everyone who is fond of landscapes, on the crop - an excellent staffer.

I use it on crop. I took 60d without a staffer, took half a shot to it and later decided that I wanted to shoot landscapes and cars. I bought a one-year-old 17-40 for 18 kilo. And now I have begun to occasionally take in use the regular 18-135. For the life of me, what did I pay 18 thousand for? For the lack of vignetting and a pleasant design. All. In turn, 18-135 has a stabilizer and a larger range of FR. Differences in sharpness, color and other indicators, I do not see. I don’t see any…

I'm not a pro, I'm an amateur, I shoot for myself. Mostly landscapes and animals using a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS ll USM. There is also Tamron 18-270, which honestly worked for more than 5 years in a variety of conditions! There were glitches with focusing, sometimes when shooting a video, you lose contact with the camera. With the purchase of a new lens from the manufacturer, and even the L series, Tamron will remain on the shelf.

4 years of excellent work. The repair with the replacement of the back of the case cost $300, but the quality of the picture was not affected in any way. Continues to reveal its capabilities now on a large matrix (5D2). To be honest, I don’t see a serious replacement for him. As a non-replaceable staffer for cropDSLR - OK, a combination of 24-105 f4L is possible for a full-frame photo, but IMHO it has a weaker picture, more aberrations (most of them are successfully choked by modern…

a good inexpensive lens, high-quality assembly (however, like all class L lenses), an excellent replacement for a regular lens on cropped cameras, it behaves like a good wide-angle lens on a crop. Sharp enough, I recommend it to those who shoot on a crop camera and are thinking about buying an L-class lens, but there is not enough money for more expensive lenses in this series. On a full frame, shoot from a focal length of 24-30 mm, the smaller picture in the corners is greatly distorted. I do…

Fabulous in speed, precision and sharpness glass. For a long time I shot on Nikon - 17-55 / 2.8, recently switched to full frame and bought this lens as a staffer. Honest 17 mm is a fairy tale! Also, compared to Nikkor, a sharper picture is ringing sharpness. Summarizing - a compact, sharp glass for a very reasonable amount. I highly recommend for those who like wide.

I have been using it in my work on the 50D camera for almost 5 months - the lens is simply armor-piercing - more than 1000 shots per working day in working conditions on the water. The protective filter has kept the lens and everything else is not amenable to external influences! a trip to the sea also did not affect. In a word - canon L-series speaks for itself! The only thing is that in poor lighting, beautiful pictures will not work, do not wait. But for 25-26000r this is the most ideal…

Now I use it on crop as a staffer. I have been looking for a high-quality sharp staffer for a long time and by trial and error settled on this. Previously tried on tamron 17-50 2.8 (bought and sold) and canon 17-55 2.8 (tested). This one is better. Advice to everyone who is looking for a crop staffer - take 17-40 L, because. in any case, you will come to it, do not spend money on cheaper analogues, because. well, they don’t give a stable, clear picture like an elka (L), anyway, then sell it…

We needed a good wide-angle lens for shooting landscapes, interiors and people at a wide angle with the highest quality picture (sharpness, color reproduction, contrast, minimal distortion and no HA). These qualities are only for L lenses. I thought about buying a Canon EF 16-35mm f / 2.8L II USM, but when I started counting the money for the purchase, common sense took over that I DO NOT PARTICULARLY need it for THIS MONEY .)) I looked in the direction of 17-40. A 1mm wide angle difference…

Everything about him has already been said a hundred times. I will only note that the lens is old and not designed for modern matrices, so whoever has a new camera with dense pixels should first look at its resolution. I would say that for 2022 it is not ideal. I switched to the ultra-wide EF-S 10-18mm 4.5-5.6 IS STM: it costs a penny, it lies in a pocket in a sock, but its sharpness in the frame is at least as good, and night shooting is better due to the stub. The picture of 10-18 is worse…

Complaints and whining about the fact that on a 35mm matrix they say it is unsubscribed only by those who are looking for a button on the camera ! MASTERPIECE! If you are worth something, think with your head how to make a plus out of a minus, this also applies to hare catchers from a supposedly bad blend. The lens elegantly spills backlight with a soft veil throughout the frame, creating a good atmospheric photo.

I shoot on a Canon 400D with software sharpening (sharpening) turned off. And everything is 100% sharp at the maximum resolution of 10MP. The abomination of digital photography compared to film is mainly due to the aggressive use of software sharpening. But not every lens allows you to turn it off. And with this you can. The photo is almost like a scanned film. With crop of 1.6, there is practically no drop in sharpness at the edges, since sharpness at the edges begins to fall just in that…

Dust does not suck in, the range of focal lengths is great for any matrix: crop 1.6: 27.2-64 is almost a regular lens, 1.3: 22.1-52 wide with the ability to take a portrait, Well, on 5d m2 there is nothing to say . Excellent hood included, waterproof design. It is my deep conviction that a series of optics with a relative aperture of 4 does not lose more aperture with 2,8; it has a different purpose . it is for maximum mobility . well, consider in comparison 70-200 / 2.8 and 300 / 2.8 on…

Most of the people who look at this lens perceive it as a staff lens, often as a replacement for a whale, and they think that by buying the cheapest lens with the magic letter L they will get an excellent universal lens, after which a bunch of deceived expectations appear. Gentlemen, this lens is NOT STANDARD. This is a very good and high quality specialized LANDSCAPE. It is designed to shoot a landscape in good light, or long exposure from a tripod. If you want a versatile lens for most…

I have been using the lens since 2022. Initially I used it on 50d - a good staff lens for most everyday tasks, now on 5d mark II and 1Ds Mark III - an excellent landscape lens on a "full frame". It conveys volume very well. Excellent accurate color reproduction (very juicy colors and tones without “gags” like on cheap plastic lenses, minimum post-processing), sharp at f 5.6 - 8 (I don’t recommend covering aperture larger than f11 - no one has yet canceled the diffraction limit). There is a…

Great item, strong and nice. Colors, work with backlight, plasticity of the picture, L-drawing - everything is on the metsa. The minimum focusing distance allows you to play around with medium-sized macro. I use it as a staff member on a crop. He copes with this task not at all 100 - it is large for a carcass xxxd (and even more so with a hood) and behaves not in the best way at the far end. Nevertheless, it was made as wide for a full frame (primarily landscape) and, I'm sure, it shows itself