Softness on the edge

Started 11 months ago | Questions thread
OP Kendunn Contributing Member • Posts: 880
comparing the 16-35 and 17-40

I think a lot of people have bought into the marketing that the 16-35 is head and shoulders better than the 17-40.  I tested my 17-40 against a friends brand new 16-35 and found the difference to be very small, and only in the corners (stopped down a couple of stops on both).  My 17-40 usually gives very satisfactory results, was just wondering if this was an issue that happened in maybe 1 out of every few hundred pictures (the lens is probably 15 years old).  DXO gives basically the same score.  Ken says they are similar also.  Here is a picture that was taken with the same lens, near the same focal length, and stopped down to f/20 to give the water a little blur so its not at its sharpest (it looks like I could have had the RAW converter set with a little too much sharpening also, this was one of the first times using this camera). Sure, the corners are slightly softer at 100%, but that's with any super wide zoom. In the real world it wouldn't matter, especially doing landscapes and being able to stop down to f/8 or f/11.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow