Would you sell? (17-40 f/4 L USM)

[Peakoverload]

I'm beginning to consider something that only a few weeks ago I said I'd never do.

I'm thinking of selling my Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L USM

These are the lenses I currently own:

Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6
Canon 17-40 f/4 L
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L

My 17-40 hasn't really been used that often which is one reason why I'm considering selling it. Now that I have the 10-20 there is only a 4mm gap between it and my 24-70 which is the second reason for considering selling it. When I shoot wide angle I normally don't use anything below f/8 so a constant aperture of f/4 is not really an issue, which is the third reason for considering selling it. The fourth reason for considering selling it is that I want to get my credit card down especially with the credit crisis looming.

So all in all it sounds like a water tight case for selling it...except:

The 17-40 handles like a dream! The 10-20 and 24-70 aren't a patch on the 17-40 for handling, the focus is so smooth and fast it feels like it glides. Focusing speeds is way faster than the 24-70 but the 10-20 is probably just as fast.

The build quality of the 17-40 is far superior. You can tell it's built to last and built to withstand lots of bangs yet doenst feel like a tank. The 10-20 and 24-70 although robust, simply aren't as 'droppable' as the 17-40.

Thanks to Ebay and Hong Kong imports the second hand value of the lens is only a fraction of what I paid for it and in all honesty not a true reflection of what the lens is actually worth especially when you consider that my lens is in Mint as new condition. This is probably the biggest reason for making me want to keep on to it.

What would you do in my position?

[stevegreen]

Sell it to me for a silly sum of money

In fairness you do have an overlap of focal length and I assume you are using it on a crop camera as you also have the 10-20 so as you say there is really no need to have it. If it's a credit card paying off exercise then why not go for it, you are not exactly going to lose that much in photography terms as you have everything covered without it........You could of course consider selling the 10-20 and keep your much loved 17-40.

[Tobers]

Simple suggestion - if you are going to get a 5D or 1D, keep the 17-40 as the 10-20 will not be usable.

If you are staying with a 1.6x crop body, keep the 10-20 and sell the 17-40.

[h4rri]

If you aren't using it then get rid as long as you are staying with the crop bodies. I use mine a lot and was thinking of losing the 24-70 as I rarely use that :|

[jonnypb]

Originally Posted by Peakoverload

Thanks to Ebay and Hong Kong imports the second hand value of the lens is only a fraction of what I paid for it and in all honesty not a true reflection of what the lens is actually worth

very true, pm me your bank details and i'll send you the £100 this afternoon

seriously like others have said if you're thinking of going FF keep it and get rid of the 10-22 instead. seems a shame to get rid of such a nice lens but if it's not used much and you need to pay off some debt...

[Peakoverload]

Full frame isn't going to be happening anytime in the near or even distant future and to be honest I'm not that interested in it either.

The reason I bought the 10-20 was because I wanted a wider lens and at the moment whenever I shoot a landscape this is the lens I reach for and, possibly because it's my latest lens and want to see what it can do, I pretty much use it only at the 10mm end.

I know I should and probably will sell the 17-40 but I can't help feel pangs of guilt and regret at loosing that handling. The 17-40 is my least used lens but its second only to my 70-200 in terms of handling and build.

[denno75uk]

Take some comfort from the fact that to sell it will demonstrate, to the missus, almost inhuman levels of common sense that you can trade in at some point in the future when you feel more comfortable abusing the CC.

[h4rri]

Originally Posted by Peakoverload

Full frame isn't going to be happening anytime in the near or even distant future and to be honest I'm not that interested in it either.

The reason I bought the 10-20 was because I wanted a wider lens and at the moment whenever I shoot a landscape this is the lens I reach for and, possibly because it's my latest lens and want to see what it can do, I pretty much use it only at the 10mm end.

I know I should and probably will sell the 17-40 but I can't help feel pangs of guilt and regret at loosing that handling. The 17-40 is my least used lens but its second only to my 70-200 in terms of handling and build.

I'm one who would rather keep it for the odd times I will use it than lose a bucket load of cash or regret it in the future. The problem is we can only have so many toys before we start leaving them at home, leave too many at home and we may as well have a G9

It's down to you but consider what you would replace the 17-40 with when you have the cash and see if that helps.

[Peakoverload]

Yeah the problem I have at the moment is that I know that I don't need the lens and that more often than not it's just going to be a lens that I leave at home and pack the 10-20 instead. This is because I find the 17-40 not wide enough some of the time and if I need to go longer than 20mm, well I have the 24-70 so why bother packing the 17-40. The thing is that I wouldn't do anything with the cash I get from selling it other than paying off some of the credit card. Whilst this is a sensible thing to do it does feel a lot like I've just thrown the lens away as I'll have nothing to show for it.

God help me I've even considered selling the 17-40 and 24-70 f/2.8 and buying the Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS!

I like the idea of having the extra reach over the 24-70 as there are times when I wish I had the extra reach but can't be bothered or don't have time to switch to my 70-200. The IS is also a nice bonus but not essential. The thing that puts me off is that it's 'only' f/4 and not f/2.8. I don't use f/2.8 that often but when I do it's because it's needed.

Would the 24-105 be worth selling both lenses for?

[h4rri]

If you aren't using it then sell it and reduce the CC cost, the reduced interest and capital can be seen as a fund to use at a later date

Originally Posted by Peakoverload

Would the 24-105 be worth selling both lenses for?

In my opinion no, I really hated my 25-105 and moved it on ASAP for the 24-70. The buyer though was more than happy with the lens, I simply didn't like the speed of it around the house and in anything but bright sunlight.

Keep the 24-70 and grab yourself a 70-200, you won't regret it

[Peakoverload]

Originally Posted by h4rri

In my opinion no, I really hated my 25-105 and moved it on ASAP for the 24-70. The buyer though was more than happy with the lens, I simply didn't like the speed of it around the house and in anything but bright sunlight.

Keep the 24-70 and grab yourself a 70-200, you won't regret it

Yeah it does seem that the 24-105 is either a love it or loathe it lens judging by what I've read. I'm 98% sure I'll stick with the 24-70 as my only two criticisms of it are:

1. The handling isn't as smooth as my Canon L lenses
2. It doesnt have an HSM motor

Other than that I really can't fault it and optically it's superb. Oh and I do have a 70-200 f/2.8 L and that's a lens I'll never ever part with. STUNNING, easily the best lens I've ever owned or used by MILES. The only thing I'd possibly consider swapping it for would be the IS version but I can't afford to do that and I wouldn't sell any of my other lenses to fund it as I'm perfectly happy without IS.

[h4rri]

Originally Posted by Peakoverload

Oh and I do have a 70-200 f/2.8 L and that's a lens I'll never ever part with. STUNNING, easily the best lens I've ever owned or used by MILES. The only thing I'd possibly consider swapping it for would be the IS version but I can't afford to do that and I wouldn't sell any of my other lenses to fund it as I'm perfectly happy without IS.

I don't find myself needing the IS and the extra weight and cost it adds just doesn't add up to me