| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/03/2014 12:40:56 AM · #1 |
Canon 16-35 f/2.8L vs. 16-35 f/4L IS
I think the f4 IS is fairly new. They both look to be about the same price, so does anyone have any opinion about one over the other? Application would be mostly architecture interiors and some group portraiture. Is IS necessary/useful on a wide angle? Is it worth trading the low light and DOF capabilities of the 2.8? |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 01:08:15 AM · #2 |
I think the question almost boils down to "Do you pixel peep"?
I read a review some time ago on these two, and essentially the f/4 is just a sharper lens, even at f/4 and above on the f/2.8 lens.
IS doesn't really matter too much, but it is nice for hand-held stuff (even at these lengths it's very useful), and will allow for super cool panning shots that work well - but you'll lose that low-light action stopping ability of the faster lens.
The difference in bokeh might make the f/2.8 attractive to you - but the speed disadvantage of the f/4 can be easily overcome with the high-ISO capabilities of your 6D.
So I don't know - if it was me, I'd probably go with the f/4 IS... (I NEED that damned lens BTW, so if they ship you an extra one, let me know)...
Message edited by author 2014-08-03 01:08:48. |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 02:16:51 AM · #3 |
| I bought the f/4. Terrific lens, and the speed difference is negligible to me. My architecture and landscape photos are going to be tripod shots at more than f/4, and wide angle for portraits generally means groups where I'll want to stop down to keep people in focus. Low light situations are offset by the IS and high ISO. |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 02:27:54 AM · #4 |
| Excellent feedback. Much appreciated. Also, I may have been wrong about there not being much difference in price - at least for the 2.8L II there is a $350-$500 cost increase over the F/4L. Anyway, I rented the F/4L from LensRentals this weekend and so I am going to be testing it out. Not sure when I'll have the funds to buy one, but I want to have an idea of what I need to be working toward. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 11:28:45 AM · #5 |
| I don't know anything about the new one, actually, but I love the f/2.8L version I have. F/2.8 on an extreme WA is a very useful luxury for low-light focusing and for minimizing DOF both. |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 01:42:39 PM · #6 |
| I recently bought this lens as an less expensive alternative to those you mention. So far, I'm VERY impressed with the results. The only down side is that the rounded front element won't allow filters. |
|
|
|
08/03/2014 03:06:41 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by wbanning:
I recently bought this lens as an less expensive alternative to those you mention. So far, I'm VERY impressed with the results. The only down side is that the rounded front element won't allow filters. |
Hey thanks for that - I am reading some reviews on it - it might be a great interim option until I win the lotto. :) |
|
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: 09/06/2025 11:16:06 AM EDT.
