Should I get the EF 17-35 f/2.8 L lens?

[suniyoka]

I’m a beginner photographer. I started analog with a Canon 3000N found in the closet with its kit lens, 28-80 f/3.5-5.6. I quickly found out that analog photography was way too expensive for a student so I bought a Canon 40D (pretty much the cheapest digital I could find) and stayed with the same lens. I was looking for an upgrade and found that old L series lenses can be affordable (about 300€)… Is 17-35 (on APS-C) worth it? Should I ignore the red ring and go for a quality third party? Any advice in general?

[ebiggs1]

If the EF 17-35 f/2.8 does what you want and need than go for it. That's all any lens can do. Nothing else matters.

[ebiggs1]

Oh, BTW, since it is an older lens make sure it is clean and fungus free. Try before you buy!

[p4pictures]

The 17-35mm f/2.8L lens is a pretty old model, but on an ESO 40D with a crop sensor it will be like a 27-56mm zoom and you'll be using mostly the central area of the lens, where the quality is best. If the lens is in good condition and that range suits you then go for it. Not many other similar range lenses have constant f/2.8 aperture across the zoom range.