secondhand 16-35 I vs new 17-40

Started Mar 10, 2008 | Discussions
hethh New Member • Posts: 1
secondhand 16-35 I vs new 17-40

What to do?

I can get an secondhand 16-35 I for the same price as a new 17-40.

I hesitate because you read a lot of bad things about the 16-35 I. I want to use this lens for landscape, architecture en indoor shooting. I use a 5D.

jgb Veteran Member • Posts: 7,505
Re: secondhand 16-35 I vs new 17-40

Make sure you test any lens you are about to purchase. Yes, either of these lenses need to be stopped down for landscape use, but if the corners don't clean up pretty well by f11, I would pass. Yes, the faster aperture would be nice at times.

Good luck. I think Canon still needs a good wide landscape lens for FF.

Regards,

Jon

hethh wrote:

What to do?

I can get an secondhand 16-35 I for the same price as a new 17-40.
I hesitate because you read a lot of bad things about the 16-35 I. I
want to use this lens for landscape, architecture en indoor shooting.
I use a 5D.

-- hide signature --
Cesare Ferrari Regular Member • Posts: 431
Re: secondhand 16-35 I vs new 17-40

Get the 16-35. There is little difference in weight, and the 16-35 has a stop advantage. The extra 1mm doesn't sound like much but is quite large.

The only advantage I know of is the 17-40 range is more useful on a cropped body but since you are FF go with the 16-35 if it's a good copy.

Pixel peeping will show that the 17-40 is a very fine lens and is comparable to the 16-35 in image quality.

Cesare

 Cesare Ferrari's gear list:Cesare Ferrari's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark II Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark II Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T1 +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads