| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/15/2008 07:53:52 PM · #1 |
Hello! just wonted to know everyones opinion in this... i bough those 16-35L lenses for about £1000 and am just an amateur photographer, ok, no my question seems that ''most of landscape photos'' i came across they are done with the 17-40L is there any reasons for that? (am saying this in regard the lenses with the canon 5D)
Would appreciate any comments on this Cheers!!!
Regards
Joel |
|
|
|
04/15/2008 07:58:36 PM · #2 |
The general consensus I've seen is the 17-40 is just as good as the 16-35 on a full frame sensor for a lot less money. Of course a few caveats:
1) 16mm vs 17mm is actually a difference you might notice if you like really wide.
2) f2.8 vs. 4.0 may come into play if you like to do night landscapes and want your stars with as little trail as possible.
3) Being wide angles, both can have some trouble with CA, although both will be smaller than consumer grade wide angle lenses.
Here is a full-frame test of the 16-35mm. You can look around the site to see if you can find the 17-40.
Generally the 17-40 gets used more because it is virtually as good for less money.
EDIT: Here's the full-frame test for the 17-40.
Message edited by author 2008-04-15 20:00:09.
|
|
|
|
04/15/2008 08:09:36 PM · #3 |
Thank you! thats was useful, i should have done this before i bought the 16-35 :s well.. now that i got them might aswell keep them :-| THANKS!!
Regards!
Joel |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 01:31:38 AM EDT.
