Canon 16-35 vs 17-40.

Started Aug 2, 2012 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Osiris30
Senior MemberPosts: 2,804
Like?
Canon 16-35 vs 17-40.
Aug 2, 2012

Guys:

I'm debating going full frame in the very near future. Most for the IQ and AF of the 5D3 (god am I glad Canon fixed the latter).

Where I'm torn is on the ultra-wide for the body. Right now on the APS platform I'm using the 10-22 which I really like. Clearly the 16-35 is an almost 1:1 match on focal length, but that 1mm won't really bother me for what I shoot, plus the extra 5mm on the long end of the 17-40 will come in handier (I think).

Usually when I'm that wide it's landscapes so stopping down to f8/11/16, etc. is the norm. The reason for my post is this:

Can anyone give me a compelling reason to spend the extra on the 16-35. Yes it's faster but I can't think of any time I'm going to need (or even care about) the 1 stop difference (even at 35mm... now the 35 1.4 is a different matter..). Is the IQ between the two roughly the same (from what I've seen the 17-40 is a more consistent lens)? What about build quality? The price difference where I am is 2x, so I need a good reason and I can't find any personally (but I figured I would ask here).

Steve

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow