[ray]

I have the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM but given my ability and the prognosis that im not going to get very much better (just maybe a tad) should i release a little cash on this lens and get a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX DC Macro ive been reading good report's about this lens and lets be serious for a while im never going to be able to use the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM to its full potential i wouldn't be asking this question if i was 35 although im enjoying myself with photography i dont kid myself i aint going to get much better everybody say aaaaah

[Dutchie]

Ray, you are impatient You've just got your 40d. Just enjoy it and take lots of photo's. Then see what you need. Someone said to me when I started. Just shoot loads of pictures. Try the camera in different ways. Make sure you know how it works. And then you slowly start to realise what your missing.

I did get the nifty fifty and did loads of trials who failed terrrible Never mind. I slowly start to realise now what i still need before I can do all my favourite subjects. And I understand most of the settings as well now.

Wanna go for a few shoots? We could learn from each other

[fionaB]

i think u are daft to get rid of it to be honest, you will only ever get better and every time u use the lens u will learn more about how to use it to get the best from it, selling it u will lose out although i think it will hold its price pretty well u are still going to lose out on it.
keep it, u have already bought it so you are not going to lose out on it

Fi

[ray]

Originally Posted by Dutchie

Ray, you are impatient You've just got your 40d. Just enjoy it and take lots of photo's. Then see what you need. Someone said to me when I started. Just shoot loads of pictures. Try the camera in different ways. Make sure you know how it works. And then you slowly start to realise what your missing.

I did get the nifty fifty and did loads of trials who failed terrrible Never mind. I slowly start to realise now what i still need before I can do all my favourite subjects. And I understand most of the settings as well now.

Wanna go for a few shoots? We could learn from each other

Well whereabouts are you duchie

[Dabhand16]

Yep - I think you are underestimating how things are going to turn out. You don't have to have an f2.8 lens to get the shallow depth of field you are after. Lots of practice will do the trick, but you need to be structured about it. No good just banging shots off with different settings, Make notes and only change one setting for each run of trials. Then when you are reviewing what you have done, you will see what has been the best way to get what you want.

As I think has been said before, a medium tele lends would be good for this and the Sigma is only 10mm more than the Canon, f2.8 or not, so in my view is not the ideal lens for this anyway.

[ray]

Originally Posted by Dabhand16

Yep - I think you are underestimating how things are going to turn out. You don't have to have an f2.8 lens to get the shallow depth of field you are after. Lots of practice will do the trick, but you need to be structured about it. No good just banging shots off with different settings, Make notes and only change one setting for each run of trials. Then when you are reviewing what you have done, you will see what has been the best way to get what you want.

As I think has been said before, a medium tele lends would be good for this and the Sigma is only 10mm more than the Canon, f2.8 or not, so in my view is not the ideal lens for this anyway.

Thanks Graham

[VinnyP]

I personally think if you get a good sample of the Sigma (I used to have one) then it will perform pretty much as well as the 17-40 on a crop sensor at F4 but you will have the extra stop when you need it. The downside is that Sigma are renowned for sample variance (I have been lucky) and it is a DX only lens so if you go full frame in the future it won't be any good. On a full frame camera the 17-40 would be an awesome lens.

[water]

Originally Posted by ray

I have the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM but given my ability and the prognosis that im not going to get very much better (just maybe a tad) should i release a little cash on this lens and get a Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX DC Macro ive been reading good report's about this lens and lets be serious for a while im never going to be able to use the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM to its full potential i wouldn't be asking this question if i was 35 although im enjoying myself with photography i dont kid myself i aint going to get much better everybody say aaaaah

Ray,Iv'e had a quick squint at the photos in your gallery and Iv'e seen the pics you've posted and i cannot for the life of me understand why you are beating yourself up.
My advice to you is,as the younger ones would say,"chill"!!.
This photography lark is supposed to be enjoyable and relaxing.Chopping and changing lenses does not,magically,'improve' photos.Most of the photos in my gallery are taken with a Sigma 18-125 or my compact Olympus 5060 [neither of which is as wide or as 'quality' as I would like].Whilst I'm not claiming them to be 'masterpieces' I also know there are some decent ones.I also know that for every 'decent' one I get,I also get a lot more duffers.Thats the way it is.I don't set out with my camera and 'expect',like I have some kind of right, to take great shots.There are so many factors outwith our control in nature/landscapes so that,if we are lucky enough [or persistant/organised enough] to be in the right place at the right time.....!
I used to live in Ballachulish [a mile from Glencoe].Beautiful part of the country but if the light/weather is not 'right' then you ain't going to get those wow factor pictures.
Enough of this rambling from me.What I meant to say was,if you don't want your 17-40 send it up to me.I might not create masterpieces with it but I will give it plenty of excercise.