Canon 17-40mm f/4 L or 10-22mm

asdflkijd · 04-23-2009, 11:43 PM

I'm about to jump on the wide angle band wagon am in a dilemma between the 17-40mm f/4 L and the 10-22mm.... I have a 40D so the 17-40mm won't be a true UWL but I love the way the lens feels and the weather proof is a plus. The only other lens I have is the 50mm 1.8, so the part where it gets hard is that I want a wide angle lens + a good walk around lens.. I don't want to be having to swap lenses every other shot. Help me decide guys, any suggestions/ comments? I've read almost every forum discussion out there but every discussion usually ends up praising both lenses....

InsaneSkippy · 04-24-2009, 12:37 AM

I've heard not so good things about the build quality of the 10-22. Also, if you're looking for a walk around lens, the added range of the 17-40 will be more beneficial. 10-12mm is pretty much unusable unless you're going for an abstract shot (even with the 1.6x crop sensor).

My vote is for the 17-40L, it will have better resale value as well (marginally better, but still better none the less)

asdflkijd · 04-24-2009, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phiberglass

I went with the 10-22. I do wish I had a longer reach and sharper from the 17-40 a lot of times. However, other times if I couldn't go lower then 17mm I wouldn't have the shot.

Are you using a crop body or ff?

SpecC · 04-24-2009, 04:56 AM

17-40 is a way better walk around lens, and i think you know that. i just bought a 12-24mm f/4 over a tamron 17-50mm on a 1.5 crop body. i think i'm going to enjoy the 12-24 for a while, but i bet i'll be annoyed later which is why i'm going to get a 50mm 1.8. Then.... well i think i should be okay. This is purely theoretical though.

dcstep · 04-24-2009, 08:06 AM

17-40 for a walk-around.

InsaneSkippy · 04-24-2009, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdflkijd

Are you using a crop body or ff?

Has to be a crop body, the 10-22 won't mount on FF Canons.

dcstep · 04-24-2009, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InsaneSkippy

Has to be a crop body, the 10-22 won't mount on FF Canons.

...and, he said 40D, a crop.

asdflkijd · 04-24-2009, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InsaneSkippy

Has to be a crop body, the 10-22 won't mount on FF Canons.

doh! lol... this is what happens when I dont get enough sleep... hahahah

amsfoto · 04-24-2009, 01:51 PM

Definitely go for the 17-40L, no question. The 10-22 is cool, but it's build quality and performance aren't near the 17-40L's. Also, if you ever plan on upgrading to a full frame camera, you will have no use for the EF-S mount 10-22mm.

17mm on a 40D is still rather wide at ~22mm...not the best but like I said, your next upgrade after the 17-40L could be a 5D, and then you would end up with a "wider" lens and a better camera with just one buy.

quarantine · 04-24-2009, 06:52 PM

I was asking myself the same question a while back. And went with the 17-40mm.
No regrets. Although sometimes I feel I need to shoot wider. So I now might get the 10-22mm as well.

Or you could go with the 10-22mm, but get a 24-70mm for a walk-around.

asdflkijd · 04-24-2009, 09:21 PM

I've decided to get the 17-40 f4 L and since its technically a 20-60 on my 40D, I might get the Sigma 10-20mm later if I really need a UWL.. I'm excited to get my first L lens

BMW F22 · 04-24-2009, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdflkijd

I've decided to get the 17-40 f4 L and since its technically a 20-60 on my 40D, I might get the Sigma 10-20mm later if I really need a UWL.. I'm excited to get my first L lens

Excellent choice!! Congrats!

rodi · 04-25-2009, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdflkijd

and since its technically a 20-60 on my 40D

27-64mm you mean?

good choice on the mid-range.

1013mm · 04-25-2009, 01:53 PM

depends on what you want to shoot.

BMW F22 · 04-25-2009, 02:13 PM

someone's selling theirs if you haven't bought it yet- http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...03#post4991303

vachss · 04-25-2009, 03:15 PM

Very different lenses and I've owned both. The 17-40 is a good all-around performer, but on a crop body the 17-55/2.8 IS is faster, sharper, has a broader zoom range and IS all for about $250 more. If looking for that range I'd much sooner recommend stretching to the 17-55.

The 10-22 is an entirely different type of lens, for big sweeping landscapes and extreme perspectives. I sold both my 17-40 and 17-55, but have kept my 10-22 for 4 years and well over 10K shots. I am getting ready to sell it now only because I've gone FF. I still think it's a must have on a crop body Canon.

clubspec330i · 04-25-2009, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vachss

Very different lenses and I've owned both. The 17-40 is a good all-around performer, but on a crop body the 17-55/2.8 IS is faster, sharper, has a broader zoom range and IS all for about $250 more. If looking for that range I'd much sooner recommend stretching to the 17-55.

The 10-22 is an entirely different type of lens, for big sweeping landscapes and extreme perspectives. I sold both my 17-40 and 17-55, but have kept my 10-22 for 4 years and well over 10K shots. I am getting ready to sell it now only because I've gone FF. I still think it's a must have on a crop body Canon.

Totally agree on that!

I had 17-55 but sold it for 17-40 when I went FF almost 2 years ago. If you plan to keep 40D and upgrade to 50D, 60D, 70D in the future, get 10-22mm. However, if FF is in your near future, 17-40L is a better investment.

Good luck..

04-23-2009, 11:43 PM	#1
asdflkijd Aberry is a scammer 579 Rep 5,507 Posts Drives: SGM E92 335i, AM E90 335i Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Seattle, WA iTrader: (14) Garage List 2008 E92 335i [10.00] 2007 E90 335i (Reti ... [9.00]	Canon 17-40mm f/4 L or 10-22mm I'm about to jump on the wide angle band wagon am in a dilemma between the 17-40mm f/4 L and the 10-22mm.... I have a 40D so the 17-40mm won't be a true UWL but I love the way the lens feels and the weather proof is a plus. The only other lens I have is the 50mm 1.8, so the part where it gets hard is that I want a wide angle lens + a good walk around lens.. I don't want to be having to swap lenses every other shot. Help me decide guys, any suggestions/ comments? I've read almost every forum discussion out there but every discussion usually ends up praising both lenses....
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

04-24-2009, 12:37 AM	#2
InsaneSkippy Lieutenant Colonel 81 Rep 1,597 Posts Drives: 135i Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida iTrader: (1)	I've heard not so good things about the build quality of the 10-22. Also, if you're looking for a walk around lens, the added range of the 17-40 will be more beneficial. 10-12mm is pretty much unusable unless you're going for an abstract shot (even with the 1.6x crop sensor). My vote is for the 17-40L, it will have better resale value as well (marginally better, but still better none the less) __________________
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-24-2009, 04:56 AM	#4
SpecC Completely obsessed with detailing 305 Rep 15,441 Posts Drives: E90 SG 330i, white Scion tC Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Francisco and Davis iTrader: (4)	17-40 is a way better walk around lens, and i think you know that. i just bought a 12-24mm f/4 over a tamron 17-50mm on a 1.5 crop body. i think i'm going to enjoy the 12-24 for a while, but i bet i'll be annoyed later which is why i'm going to get a 50mm 1.8. Then.... well i think i should be okay. This is purely theoretical though.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-24-2009, 08:06 AM	#5
dcstep Major General 1296 Rep 7,389 Posts Drives: '09 Cpe Silverstone FR 6MT Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Colorado iTrader: (0) Garage List 2009 M3 [8.40]	17-40 for a walk-around. __________________ Flickr Photos Ucm, Inc.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-24-2009, 01:51 PM	#9
amsfoto photographer 60 Rep 571 Posts Drives: AW e92 335i, JB 135i Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Rockville, MD iTrader: (4)	Definitely go for the 17-40L, no question. The 10-22 is cool, but it's build quality and performance aren't near the 17-40L's. Also, if you ever plan on upgrading to a full frame camera, you will have no use for the EF-S mount 10-22mm. 17mm on a 40D is still rather wide at ~22mm...not the best but like I said, your next upgrade after the 17-40L could be a 5D, and then you would end up with a "wider" lens and a better camera with just one buy.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-24-2009, 06:52 PM	#10
quarantine Private 4 Rep 58 Posts Drives: STi, Silvia, 968, CooperS Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Bahrain iTrader: (0)	I was asking myself the same question a while back. And went with the 17-40mm. No regrets. Although sometimes I feel I need to shoot wider. So I now might get the 10-22mm as well. Or you could go with the 10-22mm, but get a 24-70mm for a walk-around.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-24-2009, 09:21 PM	#11
asdflkijd Aberry is a scammer 579 Rep 5,507 Posts Drives: SGM E92 335i, AM E90 335i Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Seattle, WA iTrader: (14) Garage List 2008 E92 335i [10.00] 2007 E90 335i (Reti ... [9.00]	I've decided to get the 17-40 f4 L and since its technically a 20-60 on my 40D, I might get the Sigma 10-20mm later if I really need a UWL.. I'm excited to get my first L lens
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-25-2009, 01:53 PM	#14
1013mm aka 1013MM 1311 Rep 9,545 Posts Drives: pokingly flush Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Los Angeles / HK iTrader: (7) Garage List 2009 135i [8.26]	depends on what you want to shoot. __________________ -John Project YOSHI Sale Thread
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-25-2009, 02:13 PM	#15
BMW F22 Major General 3654 Rep 9,783 Posts Drives: ///M235i Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Bay Area iTrader: (8)	someone's selling theirs if you haven't bought it yet- http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...03#post4991303
	Appreciate 0 Quote

04-25-2009, 03:15 PM	#16
vachss Captain 56 Rep 815 Posts Drives: Z4 Coupe Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ventura County, CA iTrader: (1)	Very different lenses and I've owned both. The 17-40 is a good all-around performer, but on a crop body the 17-55/2.8 IS is faster, sharper, has a broader zoom range and IS all for about $250 more. If looking for that range I'd much sooner recommend stretching to the 17-55. The 10-22 is an entirely different type of lens, for big sweeping landscapes and extreme perspectives. I sold both my 17-40 and 17-55, but have kept my 10-22 for 4 years and well over 10K shots. I am getting ready to sell it now only because I've gone FF. I still think it's a must have on a crop body Canon.
	Appreciate 0 Quote