photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
lightrules | profile | all galleries >> Lens Tests by LightRules >> Canon 17-40 f4 L USM v. Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC tree view | thumbnails | slideshow

Canon 17-40 f4 L USM v. Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC

Apr 7 2005: In terms of USM and overall build, the L is one step up (though the Sigma is no slouch). The Sigma EX is an exceptionally good lens, both in value and performance. The Sigma EX is my preference in this focal range over the well-loved 17-40 L primarily because of its f2.8 speed. Optically good copies of both are "very good". Both deliver professional quality optics. Of course, if you also have a film camera or have a FF digital (or even plan to go to FF), the 17-40 L is the better choice. Other lenses to consider also are the Sigma "DG" and Tamron 17-35 lenses.

[71,500 page hits]
Non-Extended
Non-Extended		 Extended
Extended		 Extended with hoods
Extended with hoods		 Top-Down
Top-Down
17-18mmTest
17-18mmTest		 40mmTest(I)
40mmTest(I)		 40mmTest(II)
40mmTest(II)		 40mmTest(III)
40mmTest(III)

comment | share
MRC-Pics by Chris 01-Feb-2007 19:53
Thx!
Soon i will go to the local photoshop.
Put both lenses on my Camera. If the differance is so small, sometimes the feel with the lenses helps to make the right choice.
I put this site/page in my favorites, like your test.

Greetings Chris
lightrules01-Feb-2007 00:12
Greetings Chris. I have not used the new "Macro" version of the 1850EX but it should be a very good optic, very similar to the older version. It is a little bit larger, but it gives you a higher magnification. The lens does extend when zooming, so that hasn't changed. Even though I haven't used it, it should prove a good choice. Best wishes.
MRC-Pics by Chris 31-Jan-2007 23:19
Hello LightRules,

Did you already got a chance to get your hands on the new 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro.
If you did...what are your first impressions and does the new type still extend.
I ask this because i want to replace my standerd 18-55 lens.
Trying to find out if i buy the Canon 17-40 or a good and cheaper alternetife.
Tryed to ask my question in my best englisch :)

Greetings Chris (from the Netherlands)
lightrules02-Aug-2006 03:40
You can see my "Four Pound Show Down" for the 1755IS performance -- it's THE one to have on a crop body. All very good lenses, each with their own pros and cons, but the 1755IS is tremendous overall.
Bob 02-Aug-2006 03:08
Interesting tests. In addition to the Canon 17-40 and the Sigma 18-50 I am also looking at the Canon 16-35 L F2.8 as well as the Canon EF-S 17-55 F 2.8 IS. How do these additional lenses compare in this group?
Thanks for your input.
Bob
Ismail Bhana17-Oct-2005 14:13
..don't forget the Tamron SP AF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) if you're looking for a good wideangle-to-normal zoom on a 1.6 crop. I've found this lens to perform very well indeed even wide open.
tivoboy 06-Sep-2005 15:48
I have found the canon 17-40 to be excellent at 30-40mm, at 5.6 and above. At 17mm, you have to push it to f8 or so to get really steller pictures. It is really funny that a lens would offer such a contrast between 17 and 40, noticeable differances. I really wish it would be just GREAT across the range, since the RANGE is why I bought it.
lightrules19-Jun-2005 15:51
Max, focusing issues are not unheard of with some of the Sigma standard zooms (e.g., 18-50, 24-60/70, 28-70, 18-125); of course, there are focusing problems for Tamrons and some Canons too. Regardless, the 18-50 works quite well, and you should be all right. If there is a focus-related issue with your specific lens, it can be sent to Sigma for either a fix or replacement. They're quite good about this. Several folks on the forums have had their 18-50 fixed and their lenses work excellent now.
Max 19-Jun-2005 14:09
I have heard of some Sigma's mis-focusing issues when mounted on 20D or 350D. Can you comment? Thank you in advance.
Mikko Anttilainen 02-Jun-2005 19:31
OK good lenses both - but look. Look at how L performs contrast wise fully open, especially visible in the 40mm (I)!

I am glad I got the L.
lightrules14-May-2005 13:26
EVERY lens will have CA to some degree given certain extreme lighting conditions. The L does have less than this EX, but this is about the only complaint one can level against the EX optically. By f4-5.6 most of the CA should be gone. On most sized prints it isn't even an issue, even wide open.
dantesmaster 14-May-2005 12:06
I just bought the 18-50 for my 10D and like it except for some chromatic aberration. It is noticeable at f/2.8 when shooting through bright windows,etc. It is worst at f/2.8 but better by f/5.6. Have you done any tests comparing CA in the 18-50 to the L?
oluv11-Apr-2005 11:34
wow, thanks again for this great comparison. your tests are a huge and valuable source!
lightrules10-Apr-2005 04:01
You're very welcome. I'm glad these images have been of some help to you. I can say with full confidence the 18-50EX is an excellent lens and certainly a good alternative to the 17-40L on a 1.6x SLR.
Jack 09-Apr-2005 22:37
i am deciding in buying a canon 17-40 or a sigma 18-50
for my 20D;
yuor tests are real helpful..and i can say that show sigma is a valid
alternative to the canon...!
JAck.
click on thumbnails for full image