16-35/2.8L: mkI or mkII & why?

[amosfoo]

won't need an adapter for that.

 

[cqprime]

To senior cs and fellow cs members whom owns the 16-35 canon L lens.

What sort of shoots u use it for ?

What sort of shoots are limited for this set of lens?

I hv a 16-35 and use it as a general purpose lens for now. trying to find out how it can suit me more and avoid using it in shoots it cant do.

 

[Kit]

You should be buying a lens that suit your needs, not tailoring your photography to suite the lens. In any instance, what a lens can do is only limited by your own imagination.

 

[rendition]

Apart from the norms like landscape, architecture, interor & exterior, I do use my 10-22 to get those creative, funky WA distortion effects (not to be confused with pincushion/barrel distort) where if subject is close enough to your lens, you can get some cool, dynamic angles out of it. Sorry man, no pics now but you can google it and you'll find some.

OK, did a quick google, one example can be found in this link. Have fun shooting.

EDIT: Actually, since you're using 1000D, you might not be able to get the effect (very much) from your cropped camera.

 

[charlesleong]

To senior cs and fellow cs members whom owns the 16-35 canon L lens.

What sort of shoots u use it for ?

What sort of shoots are limited for this set of lens?

I hv a 16-35 and use it as a general purpose lens for now. trying to find out how it can suit me more and avoid using it in shoots it cant do.

i suspect that people using a 16-35 lens on a 1.6x crop body are few and far between. Many would use a APSC body and a 17-55 f2.8IS lens - you get longer reach and IS for less $$$.

most users of 16-35 will be using it on a FF body, and the applications of UWA on FF are completely different to WA on APSC.

 

[Dream Merchant]

There are some interesting findings on the 1635 M2 here:

http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon1635ii_a/c1635ii_a1.html

 

[cqprime]

i suspect that people using a 16-35 lens on a 1.6x crop body are few and far between. Many would use a APSC body and a 17-55 f2.8IS lens - you get longer reach and IS for less $$$.

most users of 16-35 will be using it on a FF body, and the applications of UWA on FF are completely different to WA on APSC.

i intend to upgrade to a FF body once i learn how to use a DSLR.

 

[panzerpunk]

I'm using a Mk 2... The only gripe i get about the Mk 2 is that it uses 82mm and filters (for landscape very important) for 82mm are very rare... unless you use non threaded ones like those square Cokin ones.

 

[Sweetmatahari]

FF or 1.6x -- the 17-40L will not disappoint. From own experience.

 

[fireblaster_lyz]

i need 16-35/2.8L for landscape on FF.

You wouldn't need the f2.8 for landscaping unless you are using it for general photography.
The 17-40 f4 would better meet your needs.

To sum it up:

For landscape, I would say 17-40 f4.0 for sure.

Landscape dun need fast glass. I'd get the 17-40mm anytime over the f/2.8.

17-40L. you won't need the 2.8 shooting landscape.

You should be buying a lens that suit your needs, not tailoring your photography to suite the lens. In any instance, what a lens can do is only limited by your own imagination.

FF or 1.6x -- the 17-40L will not disappoint. From own experience.

 

[engrmariano]

thanks for all the reply...

already got my 16-35 2.8L (Mk I)

i traded my 17-55 2.8 IS for it. so far im happy with its performance on my 5D2.:thumbsup:

 

[habibansari]

thanks for all the reply...

already got my 16-35 2.8L (Mk I)

i traded my 17-55 2.8 IS for it. so far im happy with its performance on my 5D2.:thumbsup:

see your a$$ tmr bro. welcome back by the way.
do update me how much u bought ur lens also.
i'm interested in that range with the low f-stop.

 

[engrmariano]

see your a$$ tmr bro. welcome back by the way.
do update me how much u bought ur lens also.
i'm interested in that range with the low f-stop.

you can try my 16-35 1ist but i still prefer 17-55 for crop bodies.

 

[charlesleong]

you can try my 16-35 1ist but i still prefer 17-55 for crop bodies.

+1.
16-35 and 17-40 are really meant for FF/APS-H bodies

for everything else (i.e. APS-C), there's 17-55 (mastercard)