File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
hi /p/, I'm new here but you guys seem nicer than /b/ ;p

I just ordered the Canon EF 17-40mm F/4.0L, arriving in a couple of days. Anyone have any experience with it, or some recommendations? ^^

Using a 1.6x crop at the moment, although the new 5D sounds awesome.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
You've already ordered it. Nothing we say is going to change anything. Just wait for it to arrive then enjoy it.
>> Anonymous
Protip: Try using it on your camera. Holding it up to your eye or a sheet of film doesn't work so good.
>> Anonymous
I made a thread about it a few months ago, it only got like 2 replies.

I rented one for the lulz because I was considering using it later on on full frame and it would serve as a standard zoom right now.

It's fine, colors are great, good contrast and usable wide open. But I wouldn't really pay $600, or $700 now because of gas prices, for it. f/4 is too slow for me.

I'd rather save up for the EF-S 17-55 or go with the 24-70 or 24-105 completely, I don't need a wide end that much but that's just me.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>/b/

and

gear thread
>> op
>>255508
$600? Hah, you evil Americans. I paid around $1,000 for it with Norwegian prices. :(
>> Anonymous
>>255777
Fellow norfag here...

I'm an olympusfag too so there's really no usable lenses available for under $800 here :\
>> Anonymous
cheapest L lens in the market, amazing quality with nice price, starting from F5.6 this lens starts to get it's L performance, below that the picture quality is a bit poor for a L, but still better than those which are not. on a APS-C frame SLR this lens is basically best and only choice in this range unless you want a EF-S, then you should probably consider a 10-22 F3.5-4.5 or a 17-55 F2.8, 10-22 is cheaper, wider, 17-55 is said to be the best EF-S so far, and the picture you get on those won't be noticeably weaker. of course if you are willing to pay 1000 more bucks for a 16-35 F2.8L or 1500 more for a 16 2.8L, those offer much better performance.
also even tho you can, but i wouldn't recommend use this on a full frame SLR, the distortion on the wide end is unacceptable for a L on those with this lens
>> Anonymous
>>256111cheapest L lens in the market

the 70-200 f/4 is the cheapest L at $600, used to be $550 before the gas prices

the 17-40 is the smallest L zoom

and the rest of your post is pretty much bullshit
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>Anyone have any experience with it, or some recommendations? ^^
Recommendation: Mount it on your camera and take pictures with it. Don't just use it as a pretense to start shitty gear threads.