| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/06/2006 09:03:59 AM · #1 |
| I just got an interesting proposition, I got a good offer for my 28mm 1.8 and 17-40 and I am thinking about selling these two to get the 16-35 since I have always craved that 2.8 aperture when I am shooting concerts and parties wich a I do a lot of so I am curious if there are other people that have gone this way, sold the 17-40 for the 16-35. Just if there was something you regretted later or just general thoughts about these two lenses since most people consider them equal in image quality. |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 09:18:15 AM · #2 |
The 16-35 should give you better low-light focus capabilities, even if you shoot stopped down a bit. I used the 16-35 at my daughter's party the other day. At ISO 800, f2.8 and with a flash with diffuser, it made the hall look a touch too light; there's no atmosphere captured, it looks as though all the lights were on.
I know that this is not answering your original question. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:19:06 AM · #3 |
When I bought the 17-40 I chose it over the 16-35 because image quality at the wide end is slightly better on the 17-40 and that's where I use it most (the 16-35 is slightly better at the long end). I use it for landscape shooting, so the F2.8 isn't too important to me.
If you need the F2.8 then I'm sure it's worth it, but why not use the 28mm F1.8 then? Do you need to go wider then 28mm? |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 10:32:38 AM · #4 |
| usually the switch is the other way around, I've heard of many photographers that have sold their 16-35 to get the 17-40.. imho the 16-35 isn't worth the extra $$ over the 17-40 |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 11:37:56 AM · #5 |
Larus, using your 17-40 @ 17mm on your 5D, do your images suffer from softness in the corners? if so, how bad?
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 11:57:13 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Larus, using your 17-40 @ 17mm on your 5D, do your images suffer from softness in the corners? if so, how bad? |
Well not BAD really but definately nothing to jump up and down in hooray at f4, they become pretty nice at f8-11. I haven´t tested this though as I am not really that much into photographing newspapers or rulers, just an observation when looking at the shots. Anyway, really appreciate the input from everyone but what I am lookin for is someone who actually has owned both of these lenses so please, no speculation and yes, I have been in countless of situations where I have needed the 2.8 aperture, if I hadn´t I wouldn´t even consider switching. The 28mm 1.8 isn´t wide enough for the kind of work I have in mind. :) |
|
|
|
02/06/2006 12:01:40 PM · #7 |
This might help, if you haven't seen it before.
16-35 vs. 17-40
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 12:49:42 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Larus:
Well not BAD really but definately nothing to jump up and down in hooray at f4, they become pretty nice at f8-11. I haven´t tested this though as I am not really that much into photographing newspapers or rulers, just an observation when looking at the shots. |
Thanks. That's encouraging. I was afraid you would say that the lens was not very good for full-frame.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 01:00:25 PM · #9 |
I got the 5D an the 17-40L and I only notice slight distortion in the corners shooting at f4 in bright sunlight, specially when shooting landscapes where I got bright blue in the corners.
in any other sircomstances I really can't see anything wrong with the pictures..
and for the slight vignetting it can easily be fixed in photoshop when shooting raw ;)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 01:30:22 PM · #10 |
You're shooting landscapes at f/4? It seems to me that the problems in the corners at f/4 aren't really an issue in 90% of situations as they'll be (at least slightly) out of focus most of the time.
Originally posted by DanSig:
I got the 5D an the 17-40L and I only notice slight distortion in the corners shooting at f4 in bright sunlight, specially when shooting landscapes where I got bright blue in the corners.
in any other sircomstances I really can't see anything wrong with the pictures..
and for the slight vignetting it can easily be fixed in photoshop when shooting raw ;) |
|
|
|
|
02/06/2006 02:10:24 PM · #11 |
[quote=jimmythefish] You're shooting landscapes at f/4? It seems to me that the problems in the corners at f/4 aren't really an issue in 90% of situations as they'll be (at least slightly) out of focus most of the time.
only in very rare occations, usually when shooting some event and the landcape is just a part of the background.
usually I shoot landscape at f8-11 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/23/2025 06:45:18 AM EDT.
