DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Canon 17-40 f/4L vs. 16-35 f/2.8L
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 11 of 11, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/23/2004 02:29:06 PM · #1
I'm considering purchasing one of these two lenses and haven't decided which one. Is the 16-35 f/2.8 worth twice the money? If so, how?
06/23/2004 02:36:03 PM · #2
Check out the comparison at Luminous Landscape LINKETY-LINK

edit: I am so addlepated sometimes............

Message edited by author 2004-06-23 14:52:59.
06/23/2004 02:46:26 PM · #3
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Check out the comparison at fredmiranda.com LINKETY-LINK


Ok.. I read this...

Looks like the 17-40 is better at 17mm than the 16-35. It looks like the 16-35 is better at 35mm than the 17-40. I'm more interested in this lens at the wider end so the 17-40 may be a better choice. I'm disappointed that there is not a 100% crop example at the 24mm range.

06/23/2004 02:50:59 PM · #4
John I have the 16-35 f/2.8 and love it. Now if you don't need the f/2.8 and can live with the f/4 I'd get the 17-40, it's the best value for your money IMHO. I got the 16-35 because I wanted the extra stop. You can't go wrong with either.

edit:

Remember that the extra 1mm translates into a 25.6mm at 16 mm vs a 27.2mm at 17mm with the 1.6x crop factor.

Message edited by author 2004-06-23 14:55:17.
06/23/2004 02:53:42 PM · #5
You should also check this out:

//www.burren.cx/photo/ultrawide/

I've been using my 17-40mm since I bought it one year ago and I really like that lens. It would be better ofcourse if it was brighter than 4.0, but that hasn't bothered me much to this point.

good luck choosing,
Amason
06/23/2004 03:30:44 PM · #6
I have owned both lenses and found them to be very comparable optically. The 16-35 that I had was quite sharp at 16mm. Really the difference you are paying for is a 1mm wider lens (might make some difference at some point?) and the f/2.8 aperture. If you feel like you really need these things then the 16-35 is the lens for you. If you can live with f/4 then the 17-40 is the lens to get. Build quality, optical performance and pretty much everything else is the same between the two lenses.

Greg
06/23/2004 05:28:38 PM · #7
John,

Recently had a similar dilema in the Nikkor group (17-35 f/2.8 vs 18-35 f/3.5-4).....ended up choosing the f/2.8

When comparing the two side by side there was a distinct difference in build quality and "heft". Also a reveiwer that I respect rated the 2.8 as one of Nikkor's finest lenses. I suspect a similar difference in the Canon line. My choice was simply one between very good versus the very best. I didn't "need" it but I sure do like it.

[as I am considering some photojournalism work, this particular lense is a staple of the pro's in that line, so it was an attempt at preparation]

Message edited by author 2004-06-23 17:31:49.
06/23/2004 05:56:31 PM · #8
I have the 16-35/2.8. So far, every lens I own is /2.8 or faster. This was a decision I made before I even got my 10D for the simple reason that Canon's 1-series bodies have 7 high-precision autofocus cross-type sensors that are only high precision with /2.8 and faster lenses. I figured that someday, I might upgrade to a body that had these HP AF sensors, and I'd want the benefit they provide. Now that I have an 1D Mark II, I'm glad I made that decision when buying lenses. =]

That being said, wide-open, my 16-35 is much sharper at 16mm than it is at 35mm, so I think it just depends on "luck of the draw".
06/23/2004 06:12:12 PM · #9
Thanks for all the input. I'm still trying to decide. The f/4 - f/2.8 difference doesn't mean a lot to me for this particular lens. Image quality, as always, is an issue. The luminous landscape article that was posted here earlier would indicate to me that the f/4 lens is sharper at 17mm than the f/2.8 lens is. This lens would likely be used at the 17mm end a majority of the time.

My Sigma 12-24 is a nice lens but it's nowhere near as sharp as I would like it to be. It's definitely wide though. I'm looking for an in between lens for the 12-24 and the 28-70. I don't use the 12-24 that often, but when I do, I can't do without it.

Autofocus is something that doesn't make much difference to me either. As time passes, I find myself using AF less and less in favor of manual focus. I haven't had any issues with AF on any of the lenses I have owned though. They all seem to work fine, but I often find that AF doesn't choose the point of focus that I would prefer. There is no way around that other than manual focus.

I think i'll sit on this thought for a while and consider the options...

06/23/2004 10:57:17 PM · #10
Originally posted by EddyG:

I have the 16-35/2.8. So far, every lens I own is /2.8 or faster. This was a decision I made before I even got my 10D for the simple reason that Canon's 1-series bodies have 7 high-precision autofocus cross-type sensors that are only high precision with /2.8 and faster lenses. I figured that someday, I might upgrade to a body that had these HP AF sensors, and I'd want the benefit they provide. Now that I have an 1D Mark II, I'm glad I made that decision when buying lenses. =]

That being said, wide-open, my 16-35 is much sharper at 16mm than it is at 35mm, so I think it just depends on "luck of the draw".


Eddy which lotto did you win? =)
06/23/2004 11:17:08 PM · #11
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I'm considering purchasing one of these two lenses and haven't decided which one. Is the 16-35 f/2.8 worth twice the money? If so, how?

Depends how much you will use it indoor,F4 would be a bad idea.
I like the 20 mm F2.8 paid 300 $ and does the wide job good !
But if I had extra 1000 $ definatelly 16-35 mm.

Message edited by author 2004-06-23 23:19:32.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/22/2021 08:46:47 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 06/22/2021 08:46:47 PM EDT.