TriStateTuners.com :: Home of Tristate Auto Enthusiast

TriStateTuners.com :: Home of Tristate Auto Enthusiast (http://www.tristatetuners.com/forum/index.php)
-   Photography (http://www.tristatetuners.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=106)
-   -   Canon 16-35mm F/2.8L II USM (http://www.tristatetuners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78734)

SoStock92 05-02-2009 05:28 PM

Canon 16-35mm F/2.8L II USM
 
Just picked this guy up today. Haven't had a chance to use it up much yet, but I snapped a couple pics coming down my driveway. LOVE the wide angle. This is on a 50D.

http://jonkensy.com/gallery/albums/u...1/cameras3.jpg

http://jonkensy.com/gallery/albums/u...35f28_test.jpg

^- That's at 35mm. I will get some wide stuff in a sec.

SoStock92 05-02-2009 05:37 PM

Here is a overhead view of a room I could typically only cover in 2 or 3 exposures!

http://jonkensy.com/gallery/albums/u...1/wideview.jpg

GregV 05-02-2009 05:42 PM

Nice.. was considering this over the 24-70 but decided I could use the $ difference elsewhere.

97TurboDSM 05-02-2009 05:58 PM

16-35 is an awesome lens. putting that bad boy on a FF camera would be TONS more fun :wink:

SoStock92 05-02-2009 06:36 PM

Hehe if I splurged for the FF (5Dmk2) I wouldn't have the $1500 for this lens haha

sisforsurfing 05-02-2009 09:58 PM

Great lens, congrats on picking it up. I've only ever used one for a few minutes but I remember it handling really well on a grip body. What made you choose it over the 17-55 IS?

BlackTypeR 05-02-2009 10:29 PM

Rented this lens last month for the weekend. Loved it, super sharp.
Congrats.

jspek 05-02-2009 10:42 PM

nice pick up.

SoStock92 05-02-2009 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sisforsurfing (Post 1352391)
Great lens, congrats on picking it up. I've only ever used one for a few minutes but I remember it handling really well on a grip body. What made you choose it over the 17-55 IS?

Cus nothin beats L glass ;)



Thanks all! Loving it so far!

97TurboDSM 05-03-2009 12:47 AM

why not the 17-40L? less than half the price and equally as sharp. is the 1mm and 1stop that big a deal?

SoStock92 05-03-2009 01:51 AM

Yeah dude I will take 2.8 over 4 any day of the week!

97TurboDSM 05-03-2009 09:00 AM

i was just curious if you would have seen any limitations from f4. f4 never presented a problem for me, especially with a camera that handles high iso so well.

sisforsurfing 05-03-2009 12:02 PM

f4 sucks.

hah, no but seriously, I even hate using f2.8 zooms when i've been using my primes for a while. double the price for another stop is normal and worth it IMO.

SoStock92 05-03-2009 01:07 PM

I have a 70-200 F4L and while very very very nice and sharp, there are times when F4 is too small. F2.8 makes all the difference, but even 2.8 is slow compared to my 1.4, but its definitely the best lens I own now!

Evan_Murphy 05-03-2009 02:11 PM

that overhead shot is awesome

97TurboDSM 05-03-2009 04:03 PM

i never found f2.8 super necessary when using a wide angle lens. mostly using it for outdoor work anyway. indoors, or weddings is different but having f4 for wide angle doesnt bother me one bit. f2.8 and greater is huge for longer focal lengths though. i would never take a 70-200/4 over my 70-200/2.8

SoStock92 05-03-2009 04:27 PM

Well my long range lens is primarily used outdoors since I don't shoot sports any longer, so I have a 70-200/4, but indoor and outdoor if a 2.8 is available I grab it.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.