| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/31/2008 12:25:47 PM · #1 |
Which is better and why? (For weddings)
Canon 17-55 2.8 IS
Canon 16-35 2.8 L
Message edited by author 2008-01-31 12:26:18. |
|
|
|
01/31/2008 12:38:50 PM · #2 |
Apart from a potential price difference which, I think, would favour the 16-35, there is no advantage for the 16-35 other than the additional mm on the wide end. For weddings in low light etc, IS can be very handy. I've had stable shots handheld at 1/5 on the wide end.
|
|
|
|
01/31/2008 12:44:39 PM · #3 |
The 17-55 is an EF-S lens, can't be used on a full frame, and it does not have the build quality the 16-35 has. From the usere reviews @ fredmiranda, it seems that the 17-55 is a dust magnet.
|
|
|
|
01/31/2008 01:43:28 PM · #4 |
Most importantly, one has a red ring and the other one does not.
|
|
|
|
01/31/2008 04:21:03 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
Most importantly, one has a red ring and the other one does not. |
Conversion kits can be bought relatively cheaply.
|
|
|
|
01/31/2008 04:22:15 PM · #6 |
I thought everything has "L" is unbeatable :P
EDIT: Exclude "Leroy"
Message edited by author 2008-01-31 16:22:45. |
|
|
|
01/31/2008 05:54:17 PM · #7 |
The only reason the 17-55mm isn't an L lens is because it's EF-S. That and the build quality which, though very good, isn't quite up to the 16-35. Optically it's extremely strong. Personally, I'd go for the extra stretch and the IS!
Message edited by author 2008-01-31 17:54:35. |
|
|
|
01/31/2008 09:21:45 PM · #8 |
|
|
|
01/31/2008 10:08:09 PM · #9 |
for weddings...assuming the 40D and no other lenses...the 17-55. Many reasons, IS being one, and the range being another.
No one looks good when shot with a wide angle and while 35mm on a crop body isn't exaclty wide angle, the 55mm length will be slightly tele and make them look better.
IS is fantastic, you can handhold to 1/5 second if need be (useful in some situations, too slow in others of course). But you will never get a shot afflicted by camera shake!
If you ever upgrade to a FF and can't use the 17-55 (even on a backup crop body) then you can sell it. It will hold it's value well.
Dust? You might see it if you look into the lens, but I've yet to have anyone show me an image where the dust has had any visiable effect.
Build quality - immaterial. Really. If weather sealing is an issue to you then it is something to be considered. ANY lens will break if dropped just-so (my 70-200 has an out of round filter mount and was never dropped...my 17-55 was dropped and has no ill effects...so much for 'build quality' IMO). I've never know anyone to wear out a lens.
Message edited by author 2008-01-31 22:10:45.
|
|
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: 06/28/2025 05:49:27 AM EDT.
