EF 17-40 f/4L: I am in a quandary!

Many of you know that I have been downsizing my equipment to reduced the weight I carry, e.g., 17-40 instead of 16-35; 70-300 instead of 70-200 + two TCs.

At the same time I am about to add back some weight with a 24mm TS-E.

My quandary is that I have the 24-105; therefore the 17-40 only adds 17-23 to my kit.

I did find that a significant amount of the time when using various SR filters I was using the 16-35 in the 24 +- range.

Realistically, I can only use the 17-23 without a lot of added filters, e.g., I could use a screw-on SR Warming PL and HH a SR Grad.

How often do you use the 17-23 range with and without filters?

Thanks for your advice on whether to keep or return the 17-40.

FYI, I bought the 17-40 from Adorama; they have a wonderful "No questions asked" 30-day return policy. Subject of a different thread.

In this particular case I have not taken a shot with the 17-40.

I have the 24-105 and Sigma 12-24. I initially bought the 12-24 for landscape but find that I dont like the results very much. It doesn't take filters at all but there are some DIY fixes for that. TBH I find anything less than 24mm too wide for landscape most of the time and find the long end of the 24-105 much more useful than 12-24 for landscape. I find the UWA effect much more useful for indoor situations or were you can get close to something to emphasize it and take the surroundings rather than landscape. But thats just my taste, UWA can give some very cool effects on FF. I may or may not hang on to the 12-24 its a useful range to have in the bag but its called upon rarely.

I guess it really depends on your style if you like using exaggerated foreground elements in your images then the 17- 24 range becomes more useful if not then I can see giving up the lens. I would not worry to much about filters since most of the same effects can be done in post as long as you can use a polarizer on the lens to eliminate glare.

Don, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I went back to my New Zealand images - the first time I was seriously introduced to strong anchor elements and used the 16-35 - except for a few images, all of them were shot at 24mm or greater to avoid the vignetting that occurred from using the Lee filter holder with Grads, and stacking that on top of one or more circular filters.

The lens is going to be returned.

No problem I still would not return it because of limited filter use you can get around those issues but if it does not fit your photographic style there is no reason to keep it BTW the 24 TS-E lens is one sweet lens if I did more landscape work i would sell some of my long glass to get one.

Just wish there was a wide-wide angle for a FF sensor that wasn't a fisheye. The Tamron 10-24 would be perfect except it is for a cropped sensor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jay Gould

Just wish there was a wide-wide angle for a FF sensor that wasn't a fisheye. The Tamron 10-24 would be perfect except it is for a cropped sensor.

---

Jay,
For me the solution is simple. First, the widest angle lens I own is a 20 mm f/2.8, but I rarely carry it. Usually my shortest lens is 28 mm. When I need wider, I just do a mosaic. That also gives me more pixels on the subject for those big enlargements, and it saves weight as well as money.

Roger

As always, thanks for your sage advice! Cheers, Jay

Hi jay .. most of my landscape shots are also at 24mm although i have wider options.. I have heard only great things about the 24 TS-E. One of canons sharpest wide angles.. As roger said ,just try a mosaic ,,

I just ordered the TSE; it will be delivered to Arizona where I am shooting for two weeks. Looking forward to a play with the new baby.

Yesterday I was out shooting and did a couple of five-image groups (one group in vertical mode; one group in horizontal mode) where I moved the point of focus from the bottom of the image up 20% each time; I will process in Helicon Focus. Because of the lighting, I was also HH a 2-stop soft GND to tone the sky. What a PIA to accomplish the five images!! My understanding is that with the TSE I will only have to do one focus and I will also be able to rotate significantly in both directions for a three frame stitch that is "supposedly" perfectly in alignment, and sharp edge to edge. I do know there is a lot to learn about this lens; that is why I am doing a workshop next year with Darwin Wiggett in Canada.

Hi jay..I found a kelby training course on the net by Moose Peterson.Where he describes how to use the TS-E for panoramics or mosaics.. Somthing like shoot portrait then full shift up then full shift down ,Then do the same on left and right 3rd overlapping... all the Best..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brian simpson

Hi jay..I found a kelby training course on the net by Moose Peterson.Where he describes how to use the TS-E for panoramics or mosaics.. Somthing like shoot portrait then full shift up then full shift down ,Then do the same on left and right 3rd overlapping... all the Best..

---

Do you have the link? Thanks,

No.. sorry Jay,,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brian simpson

No.. sorry Jay,,

---

No problem, I found it.