16-35L or 14mm prime?

Lee Rothman · Jul 15, 2002

So many have axes to grind with the new 16-35 2.8L. It has been THE answer to all my wide angle needs. I find it contrasty with great color, and frankly not to shabby in the sharpness department either. Here is an example.....

rcliff · Jul 15, 2002

Lee, you need to post the full size image unmodified or full size crops preferably showing the edges. My experience with this lens was horrible. I agree that the contrast is quite good but the softness and CA at the edges were unacceptable.

Cliff

Lee Rothman said:
So many have axes to grind with the new 16-35 2.8L. It has been THE
answer to all my wide angle needs. I find it contrasty with great
color, and frankly not to shabby in the sharpness department
either. Here is an example.....

Jason Hutchinson · Jul 15, 2002

Are you trying to say you can't judge sharpness of a DSLR lens from a .25Mpixel image that's been post processed?

I personally get a kick out of all the "see, the X lens isn't soft, check out my postage stamp sized over-sharpened image as proof."

Rcliff said:
Cliff

Lee Rothman said:

So many have axes to grind with the new 16-35 2.8L. It has been THE
answer to all my wide angle needs. I find it contrasty with great
color, and frankly not to shabby in the sharpness department
either. Here is an example.....

Click to expand...

Lee Rothman · Jul 15, 2002

Unlike some around here I'm not going to suck the bandwidth of this forum dry by posting full sized images. You can see it at:

http://www.pbase.com/traveler in the "Travels" gallery. There is NO CA and it IS sharp. AS I said I don't know what all of the full is about. The corners on my copy are just fine. I guess there must be some variances as always between copies. I Just don't condemn an entire model line for "some" that aren't up to snuff. Keep trying..IMHO it's worth it...

no name 3 · Jul 15, 2002

Marco said:
As for me, I've ordered an adapter to use a Zeiss Distagon 18mm on
my 1D.
I'll report my feedback.

Marco,

I've also gone the Contax route, though I started with the much less expensive 28mm 2.8. Did you get the adapter from Bob Shell?

Here are some threads you might want to look into and post replies to once you get more hands-on experience:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003UPB

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=3014885

Please do let us know how it works out! I was trying to debate between the 18mm or 21mm as the next lens to try.

--
jason: http://www.jcwphoto.net

Buchan-Grant · Jul 15, 2002

Hi

I use a Sigma 14mm (the previous f3.5 version) and a Canon 20 mm. The Canon 20mm is hardley off my body for landscapes, one of the main reasons being the fact you can use filters on the front of it! The 14mm, although used much less is staying in the kit bag! Its a specialist lens, for extreme shots but if you stop it down it will produce great images.

I am getting a used 20-35 F2.8L tomorrow in the hope of adding some versatility and if the quality is as good as my 20mm I'll be selling the 20!

SteveX said:
I am asking those who have used both of these lenses:

When used with a D60, which lens seems to take sharper pictures,
and, which lens exhibits the least amount of barrel distortion?
(assuming the same f-stop is used on all lenses)

Canon 16-35L (AT 16mm) or

Canon 14mmL prime or

Sigma 14mmEX prime

I am trying to decide on one of these three lenses for wide angle
photography and sharpness and distortion are my main critieria.

Thanks for any help you guys can give me,

Steve

--
Neil
http://www.neilbuchangrant.co.uk
and remember:
'Nightly Bile Beans keeps you young, healthy and bright!'

Jack O'Neill · Jul 15, 2002

I agree with you completely Lee, I keep my 16-35 on my D60 almost all the time and in most cases if I were to pick only one of my lens to take it would be this one. I consider I'm getting more than my moneys worth with it. Maybe I was just lucky to get a great one the 1st time around. If anyone is interested in it, just buy from Delta and try it out. If it is not what you expected they will exchange it or refund your money.

Jack

Lee Rothman said:
So many have axes to grind with the new 16-35 2.8L. It has been THE
answer to all my wide angle needs. I find it contrasty with great
color, and frankly not to shabby in the sharpness department
either. Here is an example.....

James Akiyama · Jul 15, 2002

I have both lenses; I probably use the 16-35mm more due to its versatility in zoom, ability to use filters, and less "prone to damage" front element. On a D60, the lense remains sharp to the edges (due to the 1.6x cropping); on my EOS 3, there is a slight softening at the corners.

One thing I like about the 16-35mm zoom is that it, along with Canon's 28-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L, and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L all use a 77mm filter thread. This allows me to only have to bring along a single polarizer (note that the polarizer will have a variable effect on the 16-35mm at the 16mm end). It also allows me to interchange UV between lenses if one get splattered with moisture or dirt.

Of course, there's always those shots which need the widest angle available; that's when I'll pull the 14mm out.

If I were to get only one, it'd be the 16-35mm f/2.8L, but that's a somewhat personal choice.

Lee Rothman · Jul 15, 2002

I use my Hoya Slim SMC Circular Polarizer with NO vignetting on a 1D, and the Hoya Super HMC PRO1 UV filter stays on it all the time. I also use the CokinP holder with Singh-Ray graduated neutral density filters attached. Filters LOVE this lens AFAIAC...

Buchan-Grant said:
I am getting a used 20-35 F2.8L tomorrow in the hope of adding some
versatility and if the quality is as good as my 20mm I'll be
selling the 20!

SteveX said:

I am asking those who have used both of these lenses:

When used with a D60, which lens seems to take sharper pictures,
and, which lens exhibits the least amount of barrel distortion?
(assuming the same f-stop is used on all lenses)

Canon 16-35L (AT 16mm) or

Canon 14mmL prime or

Sigma 14mmEX prime

I am trying to decide on one of these three lenses for wide angle
photography and sharpness and distortion are my main critieria.

Thanks for any help you guys can give me,

Steve

Click to expand...

--
Neil
http://www.neilbuchangrant.co.uk
and remember:
'Nightly Bile Beans keeps you young, healthy and bright!'

Taz61703 · Jul 15, 2002

Steve:

I'm currenly evaluating a second Canon 16-35, and I'm here to tell you that there is absolutely a variability between copies. The first lens I had clearly had a "back-focusing" problem, but it's stengths were still clearly evident.

With this second lens I've only shot a handful of test pics, but already I can tell the back-focusing issue is not there. However, so far, this one does not appear to be as sharp edge to edge as the first one was. But as I said, I really haven't run it through it's paces as yet. Headed to a shoot at a local nature perserve tomorrow that should settle things.

The bottom line is, make sure you do business with a dealer that will agree to exchange it or refund your money if not satisfied. Delta International has been mentioned...and so far, in spite of being shipped a Nikon lens instead of a replacement Canon 16-35 (which they did make right via UPS overnite), I feel confident that I will be able to return it for refund should I decide to chuck the whole idea a wide zoom.

-Taz

Kenny Frank · Jul 16, 2002

Before a recent trip to the Galapagos Islands I bought a Canon 14mm to use with my D60. I was considerening the 16-35L as well.

The 14mm is a truly wonderful lens. Not only is it extremely sharp with no discernable distortion, the color saturation is truly amazing. I used a variety of lenses from the 14mm through the 50mm 1.4, 100 F2.8 macro, the 200 F2.8L and 35-350L, and can tell you the pictures with the 14mm stood out from all of them.

As good as the 16-35L is, it is no match for the 14mm. The real question is whether you need the versatility of a zoom, vs. the fixed focus. But if you get the Canon 14mm you will not be disappointed.

SteveX said:
I am asking those who have used both of these lenses:

When used with a D60, which lens seems to take sharper pictures,
and, which lens exhibits the least amount of barrel distortion?
(assuming the same f-stop is used on all lenses)

Canon 16-35L (AT 16mm) or

Canon 14mmL prime or

Sigma 14mmEX prime

I am trying to decide on one of these three lenses for wide angle
photography and sharpness and distortion are my main critieria.

Thanks for any help you guys can give me,

Steve

Marco · Jul 16, 2002

Jason C Wu said:
Marco,

I've also gone the Contax route, though I started with the much
less expensive 28mm 2.8. Did you get the adapter from Bob Shell?

Yes, two weeks ago.

no name 3 said:
Here are some threads you might want to look into and post replies
to once you get more hands-on experience:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003UPB

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=3014885

Interesting threads Jason, I'll report my experience with my 1D and Zeiss Distagon 18.

no name 3 said:
Please do let us know how it works out! I was trying to debate
between the 18mm or 21mm as the next lens to try.

I'll keep you all informed, for sure. I was also debating between the 18 and the 21 (which from some tests is an astounding lens...). Probably when a full frame 1D will be released a 21mm could be wide enough, but now I really need the 18mm.

If only Canon would release a 17/2.8L (even f/3.5L) with the quality of the 135/2L...

Take care..
Marco

SteveX · Jul 18, 2002

Thank you for all the replies! Looks like i will just have to make a decision soon enough. And it will be either:

1) a 14mm prime and a 20 or 24mm prime

or

2) the 16-35L Zoom

I am particularly interested in using either one of these solutions for shooting exteriors and interiors of homes. Perhaps somebody could give me some advice as to which of the above solutions might work out best, for this particular wide angle need?

And what FOV range do you guys suggest as the best for exterior shots? I am concerned that the 14mm lens on a D60 will be TOO WIDE for exterior shots.

Steve

mark kay · Jul 18, 2002

STeve.. I have a 16-35 and I just ordered the 14mm canon off ebay. I will get it early next week and do some comparisons. For your work it sounds like option 1 is the best choice. I mean if that is your main shooting, then two good primes seems reasonable. The other question i guess is what will you do with the images. If you are only going to use them on the web and not print, the zoom may be more than adequate. mark

SteveX said:
Thank you for all the replies! Looks like i will just have to make
a decision soon enough. And it will be either:

1) a 14mm prime and a 20 or 24mm prime

or

2) the 16-35L Zoom

I am particularly interested in using either one of these solutions
for shooting exteriors and interiors of homes. Perhaps somebody
could give me some advice as to which of the above solutions might
work out best, for this particular wide angle need?

And what FOV range do you guys suggest as the best for exterior
shots? I am concerned that the 14mm lens on a D60 will be TOO WIDE
for exterior shots.

Steve

Jan Brittenson · Jul 18, 2002

At $1325 (B&H) including Bob Shell adapter the 18/4 T* sure is very tempting.

Marco said:
Marco said:

Adams, Gutmann, Steichen, Stigletz, Weston. they lead by example.

Click to expand...

Completely agreed...

Take care

Marco

--
Jan Brittenson
http://www.rockgarden.net/janbrittenson/gallery

SteveX · Jul 18, 2002

mark kay said:
STeve.. I have a 16-35 and I just ordered the 14mm canon off ebay.
I will get it early next week and do some comparisons. For your
work it sounds like option 1 is the best choice. I mean if that is
your main shooting, then two good primes seems reasonable. The
other question i guess is what will you do with the images. If you
are only going to use them on the web and not print, the zoom may
be more than adequate. mark

Mark,

I am very interested to hear your comparisons of the 16-35L vs the 14mm, once you've had a chance to do so.

I will be using these images in printed flyers and brochures. The flyers will be primarily 8.5x11 size. Though I may do some 11x17s also. In addition, some occasional small poster size prints, when requested. Those would be done on an HP5000 DesignJet printer.

I think if i were going to be shooting for "web use" only, I wouldn't even bother with a DSLR and instead use something like a G2, or an Olympus E20.

Steve

lemvo · Jul 19, 2002

Me too I would be very interested in such a comparison !!
Can you please post your findings and the pictures...
Thank you very much !!

mark kay said:
SteveX said:

Thank you for all the replies! Looks like i will just have to make
a decision soon enough. And it will be either:

1) a 14mm prime and a 20 or 24mm prime

or

2) the 16-35L Zoom

I am particularly interested in using either one of these solutions
for shooting exteriors and interiors of homes. Perhaps somebody
could give me some advice as to which of the above solutions might
work out best, for this particular wide angle need?

And what FOV range do you guys suggest as the best for exterior
shots? I am concerned that the 14mm lens on a D60 will be TOO WIDE
for exterior shots.

Steve

Click to expand...

Woody W. · Jul 19, 2002

Steve,

Maybe I missed it, but was there a reason you did not consider the Sigma 15-30 EX an option in this case?

Woody -

SteveX said:
Thank you for all the replies! Looks like i will just have to make
a decision soon enough. And it will be either:

1) a 14mm prime and a 20 or 24mm prime

or

2) the 16-35L Zoom

I am particularly interested in using either one of these solutions
for shooting exteriors and interiors of homes. Perhaps somebody
could give me some advice as to which of the above solutions might
work out best, for this particular wide angle need?

And what FOV range do you guys suggest as the best for exterior
shots? I am concerned that the 14mm lens on a D60 will be TOO WIDE
for exterior shots.

Steve

--

Woody -

Eqiupment: Lots.

Favorite Quote: 'Never let the quest for the Perfect become the enemy of the Excellent'

Andi Steiner · Jul 19, 2002

SteveX said:
When used with a D60, which lens seems to take sharper pictures,
and, which lens exhibits the least amount of barrel distortion?
(assuming the same f-stop is used on all lenses)
Canon 16-35L (AT 16mm) or
Canon 14mmL prime or
Sigma 14mmEX prime

In terms of optical quality, primes are always better and cheaper than zooms.

SteveX said:
I am trying to decide on one of these three lenses for wide angle
photography and sharpness and distortion are my main critieria.

At this point, I usually say "go for the 16-35mm because the 14mm Canon and Sigma zoom really, really badly..."

Seriously: You have to decide first what you need/want, i.e. a) the optical quality of primes or b) the flexibilty of a zoom. There are no general answers to this questions, it depends on what you're shooting.

I own a 16-35mm and it serves my purposes very, very well. There is no alternative to this lens without making one or the other compromise. Another advantage of this lens is that it will become even more valuable if I go for a body with a lower focal length multiplier than the D30/D60 in a couple of years.

All of the lenses you mention are expensive. If you don't have any experience with these kind of lenses, it is always a good idea to rent before buying.

Kind regards
Andi

--
Andreas Steiner Photography
http://www.andreassteiner.net/photography

mark kay · Jul 19, 2002

I will post as soon as I get the lens. Probably next week. Also, the sigma does not give you f2.8 and this could be problematic for indoor shooting. The other advantages/disadvantages have been discussed. I even posted a comparison of hte 15-30sigma and 16-35. THe sigma is better or as good at 15/16mm but falls off after that by 24mm. mark

Woody W. said:
Maybe I missed it, but was there a reason you did not consider the
Sigma 15-30 EX an option in this case?

Woody -

SteveX said:

Thank you for all the replies! Looks like i will just have to make
a decision soon enough. And it will be either:

1) a 14mm prime and a 20 or 24mm prime

or

2) the 16-35L Zoom

I am particularly interested in using either one of these solutions
for shooting exteriors and interiors of homes. Perhaps somebody
could give me some advice as to which of the above solutions might
work out best, for this particular wide angle need?

And what FOV range do you guys suggest as the best for exterior
shots? I am concerned that the 14mm lens on a D60 will be TOO WIDE
for exterior shots.

Steve

Click to expand...

--

Woody -

Eqiupment: Lots.
Favorite Quote: 'Never let the quest for the Perfect become the
enemy of the Excellent'

16-35L or 14mm prime?

Lee Rothman

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Lee Rothman

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Jack O'Neill

Guest

Leading Member

Lee Rothman

Guest

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Active member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts