Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 10, 2009, 1:32 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

Under what circumstances would I need this lens?

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

I currently have a 24-70 f/2.8 lens.

I am not saying the 16-35 is a bad lens. I am trying to understand what I'd gain by adding this lens to my bag. Neither lens has image stabilization, both are sharp lenses, both are fast lenses.

Faithfully Yours,
FP
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 10, 2009, 1:41 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

on a FF (aka your 5d) it performs as an ultrawide angle lens, great for emphasizing foregrounds in landscapes, adding expansiveness to skies, archictecture, etc, just anywhere your 24-70 isn't wide enough. whereas your 24-70 is more of a normal zoom.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 1:43 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The widest angle of view your 24-70/2.8 has is about 59.

The 16-35/2.8 can go as wide as about 80.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 2:07 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I would also suggest need drive gear purchase not the other way around. Change your thought process - don't look at a solution and search for the problem. Start with a problem and work toward a solution. I've mentioned this in the past - buying expensive gear is not necessarily the way to make great photographs. In fact it can be severely detrimental to the process. When you simply buy new toys you want to play with them. Your emphasis becomes the toy and not the photography. Work on the photography part. When you've got a handle on that, you'll know whether or not you need a 16-35 f2.8 lens.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 6:08 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

I doubt any serious photographer would use the 16-35mm @ f/2.8...

The purpose of this lens is to get maximum DOF
Most people will use this lens stopped down to get everything into focus (i.e. both foreground and background)

-> The f/2.8 here is to aid focus or to compose pictures in the dark without missing any detail, but rarely anyone shoot this lens @ f/2.8 for selective focus...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 8:41 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

@NHL,
actually at f2..8 the lens performs decently well that i use this quite often in low light. specifically street photography.

I got the lens for low light candid/event pictures and have been using it very much....but as u said, if i am going to get this for landscapes i would definitely be shooting at F8 and would be shooting between 16-20mm.

as you said, f2.8 is a great aid for focussing and the lens focusses very quiet and very fast....
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 8:49 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

Quote:
24-70 is more of a normal zoom.
actually on the 5D even 24mm is kinda really wide. the 17mm lenses for 1.6x crop starts at effective 27mm. 24-70 of full frame for me is like wider to standard zoom

thats why my 24-105 almost stayed forever in my 5D untill i sold my 5D

16mm as you said is really ultra wiide. i would rather get the 12-24 sigma instead of 16-35 that 12mm on 5D works really well

16mm on a 1.3x..will post the 12mm on 5d ..currently having some probs with my account

nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 10:44 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
I would also suggest need drive gear purchase not the other way around. Change your thought process - don't look at a solution and search for the problem. Start with a problem and work toward a solution. I've mentioned this in the past - buying expensive gear is not necessarily the way to make great photographs. In fact it can be severely detrimental to the process. When you simply buy new toys you want to play with them. Your emphasis becomes the toy and not the photography. Work on the photography part. When you've got a handle on that, you'll know whether or not you need a 16-35 f2.8 lens.
A few months ago, you advised me to find a photographer and follow him around.

I took that advice.

A friend of a friend made the introduction. He's an older gentleman, needed help carrying equipment, shoots very little these days, only for friends and special occasions.

He has a son and daughter in law in a marriage that was on the doorstep of divorce. Both already had contacted attorneys. He asked me to visit with them and see if I could help. Turns out their biggest problems were actually inter-related and not all that difficult to fix. Once both husband and wife realized what was going on, any decent marriage therapist could have helped them.

I never accept money for counseling. Whether we go to church together or are members of the same denomination, or complete strangers, I don't want to be paid. People in need of counseling don't need an additional financial burden of counseling fees.

My photography mentor looked in my bag and saw that I didn't have the lens we're discussing in this thread. He offered it to me out of his bag, as a thank you gift for helping his son and daughter in law.

I turned it down, told him I didn't think I'd put the lens to good use. I said that because a) I had no idea what that lens does and b) the red ring on the canon lens told me it was an expensive lens. I was sure it was worth much more than what I deserved for the 10-12 sessions we had.

So in a strange way, the forum here saved a marriage and taught me something about a lens that landscape photographers probably enjoy so much more than a guy who lives in one of the flattest states in the USA, where telephone poles are sometimes mistaken for scenery.

Faithfully Yours,
FP

Last edited by FaithfulPastor; Nov 10, 2009 at 10:47 PM.
FaithfulPastor is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:14 AM.