<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Canon 17-40L versus 18-55 IS comparison test</title>
	<atom:link href="http://camerablognetwork.com/2009/05/canon-17-40l-versus-18-55-is-comparison-test/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://camerablognetwork.com/2009/05/canon-17-40l-versus-18-55-is-comparison-test/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:13:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: alexgowers</title>
		<link>http://camerablognetwork.com/2009/05/canon-17-40l-versus-18-55-is-comparison-test/comment-page-1/#comment-3488</link>
		<dc:creator>alexgowers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://camerablognetwork.com/?p=392#comment-3488</guid>
		<description>I think that it&#039;s unfair to compare them as the older 17-40L could be better if it was designed for use on a cropped body. It&#039;s still a great lens for full frame. If you consider some might want to progress to full frame at a later date the lens is still better value as can be transferred and used as very wide angle lens. 

The 18-55 is a great lens and i agree that there is no way that you can even tell the difference in most images. But we all know no L glass will ever be an ef-s lens. Take a look at the canon 17-55 2.8, now that is sharper than L glass comparing full frame output to cropped. That is a fair comparison and if you look at the cash involved we are talking similar value. 

To this day I think the full frame system is just that bit better for Bokeh and film like feel but there are some real amazing cropped lenses that kinda negate the need to switch up. 

alex</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that it&#8217;s unfair to compare them as the older 17-40L could be better if it was designed for use on a cropped body. It&#8217;s still a great lens for full frame. If you consider some might want to progress to full frame at a later date the lens is still better value as can be transferred and used as very wide angle lens. </p>
<p>The 18-55 is a great lens and i agree that there is no way that you can even tell the difference in most images. But we all know no L glass will ever be an ef-s lens. Take a look at the canon 17-55 2.8, now that is sharper than L glass comparing full frame output to cropped. That is a fair comparison and if you look at the cash involved we are talking similar value. </p>
<p>To this day I think the full frame system is just that bit better for Bokeh and film like feel but there are some real amazing cropped lenses that kinda negate the need to switch up. </p>
<p>alex</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://camerablognetwork.com/2009/05/canon-17-40l-versus-18-55-is-comparison-test/comment-page-1/#comment-1596</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:42:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://camerablognetwork.com/?p=392#comment-1596</guid>
		<description>LP - I don&#039;t see anything wrong with the comparison in all honesty. Both are on a crop sensor, rending the comparison pretty equal. The 17-40 is actually much worse in the corners on full frame.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LP &#8211; I don&#8217;t see anything wrong with the comparison in all honesty. Both are on a crop sensor, rending the comparison pretty equal. The 17-40 is actually much worse in the corners on full frame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: L.P.O.</title>
		<link>http://camerablognetwork.com/2009/05/canon-17-40l-versus-18-55-is-comparison-test/comment-page-1/#comment-1593</link>
		<dc:creator>L.P.O.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 08:04:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://camerablognetwork.com/?p=392#comment-1593</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sorry to say, but this is an invalid comparison with an incorrect result. You have have compared 40% of a EF exstreme wide angle zoom to 100% of an EF-S normal zoom. In other words, you have used the EF17-40 on a body that doesn&#039;t use even half of its picture, then you&#039;ve draw conclusions without stating that this is the case.

I could just as easily claim that the 17-40 is the clear winner because the 18-55 cannot be used with a digital camera, without specifying that by &quot;camera&quot; I mean 35 mm Full Frame equipment.

You should do is to clearly express that you are comparing how the two respective lenses act on small sensor, 1.6 crop cameras, and that the test results only tell how these two respective lenses act against each other when you are using an EF-S camera. In other words, you do not put these two lenses against each other at optimal conditions, but you are confining yourself to the EF-S camera mount.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sorry to say, but this is an invalid comparison with an incorrect result. You have have compared 40% of a EF exstreme wide angle zoom to 100% of an EF-S normal zoom. In other words, you have used the EF17-40 on a body that doesn&#8217;t use even half of its picture, then you&#8217;ve draw conclusions without stating that this is the case.</p>
<p>I could just as easily claim that the 17-40 is the clear winner because the 18-55 cannot be used with a digital camera, without specifying that by &#8220;camera&#8221; I mean 35 mm Full Frame equipment.</p>
<p>You should do is to clearly express that you are comparing how the two respective lenses act on small sensor, 1.6 crop cameras, and that the test results only tell how these two respective lenses act against each other when you are using an EF-S camera. In other words, you do not put these two lenses against each other at optimal conditions, but you are confining yourself to the EF-S camera mount.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
