For a week now I'm testing my new favorite lens, the Canon 17-40mm 1: 4 L USM
Beautifully in color, contrast and image effects - so the photos look so.
I use it on an EOS 5D Mark II on full frame.
And yes, the corners are very muddy in 17mm and F4.
For fast-action shots do not bother me particularly because the main subject is usually sharp.
And it's always sharp - and quickly the precise autofocus.
In such a scene-snapshots the significant vignette is at full aperture images
some extra charm. It's worth the vignettes correction off sometimes.
(Or RAW data to be used)
But I'm more Langzeitbelichter, happy evening with the tripod on the go, or in dark churches and temples.
Architecture and City is my favorite thing!
Between 19 and 24mm, even the corners are then sharp enough for a poster at aperture 8!
And at this aperture the vignetting is very mild.
Flares are very controlled, and at 20-24mm there is no distortion! (Poster with ruler checked !!!)
Even with 17mm, the corners are a little better dimmed. Distortion very very little "ton".
Purple fringing at maximum aperture only 3 pixels at the edges. That is also L-typical!
In order to compare:
Recording with the 24-105 F4 L IS USM at 24mm full aperture significantly worse in all respects!
(Here then strong ton, strong vignette, muddy corners, less color / contrast / Agility)
This appearance, however, is superb between 50 and 90mm! (Apart from the pincushion distortion)
I own both lenses, and would the 17-40 draufmachen even for 24mm shots!
That it does not have IS, and no F2.8 is less dramatic.
Joy of Architecture / Landscape / Night Scene / Action photos (in good light) can be happy here.
Addition:
It has a 77mm filter thread, like my EF 24-105mm 5D Mark II kit lens, which saves money!
I would recommend it to good friends!
MfG
Ingo
