canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

Started Apr 24, 2013 | Discussions
kreidberg Junior Member • Posts: 40
canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

I will be upgrading after many years from the 30D to the 5D MkIII. I have the original 16-35 L 2.8.  I do mostly nature landscape photography, not much architecture except when sightseeing in cities.

My biggest concern is sharpness as I enlarge my best shots to 17 X 22.  Given that I already have the original 16-36 would I see better sharpness in big enlargements with the 14 mm vs, upgrading from the original 6-35 to the 16-35II?

On another line, same question for the 24-70.  I've read great things abou the newer version, exept the construction doesn't see as strong as the original.

thanks very muh

Jordan

Canon EOS 30D Canon EOS 5D
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Dougs_Photo Regular Member • Posts: 127
Re: canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

If you like the range of the 16-35 on your crop camera you will probably find it is too wide on a full frame camera. If you liked the range you had on the crop I would get the 24-70 for the full frame as it will seem both wider and longer. I have the 16-35 II and it is a good lens on my 5D3 when I need something very wide but the corners are soft until stopped down a little.

Doug

 Dougs_Photo's gear list:Dougs_Photo's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EOS D30 Canon EOS 50D +28 more
iShootWideOpen
iShootWideOpen Regular Member • Posts: 354
Re: canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

I would sell the 16-35L (very weak on FF) and replace it with the 24-70L II and a Samyang 14mm. The Samyang is at least as good as the 14L II is resolution (possibly better) but with more distortion. The 24-70L II is a spectacular lens for shooting everything.

 iShootWideOpen's gear list:iShootWideOpen's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +12 more
Gunzorro Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

The 16-35L II will be better than the original. It's one of my most-used lenses.

wazu
wazu Senior Member • Posts: 1,408
Re: canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

I had a difficult time buying a wide angle for my 5D2. The kit 24-105 is not nearly wide enough for my idea of landscapes and architectural photography. I tested some used 14L mkI and was not impressed with the CA and softness. Then I pitted a new 14L mkII against the 16-35 mkII in a store and was literally blown away by the 14L. However after long deliberation about difficulties to use filters and versatility of the zoom I decided to purchase the 16-35L II. Now ever time I am at the wide end (which is usually always) I regret not having spent the extra cash on the 14L II. I have since read people rigging Lee filter systems onto lenses like the 14 and in hindsight I definately would like to reverse my decision and be shooting ultra wide ultra sharp and ultra undistorted.

Another member mentioned the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14. I have read that it is a crap shoot with the quality control on these. Seen many used on the market but rarely a 14L and then it is only slightly lower than new price. The mustache distortion on the Korean 14 is alsomvery difficult to compensate for in post. On top of that who wants to only MF these days. I have a Zenitar 16mm 2.8 fisheye that rarely gets used because I find manually focus is difficult through the viewfinder and tedious with live view.

-- hide signature --

There is a crack in everything That's how the light gets in. - Leonard Cohen

kevindar
kevindar Veteran Member • Posts: 4,549
Re: canon EF 14mm vs upgrade to new 16-35 for new full frame

wazu wrote:

I had a difficult time buying a wide angle for my 5D2. The kit 24-105 is not nearly wide enough for my idea of landscapes and architectural photography. I tested some used 14L mkI and was not impressed with the CA and softness. Then I pitted a new 14L mkII against the 16-35 mkII in a store and was literally blown away by the 14L. However after long deliberation about difficulties to use filters and versatility of the zoom I decided to purchase the 16-35L II. Now ever time I am at the wide end (which is usually always) I regret not having spent the extra cash on the 14L II. I have since read people rigging Lee filter systems onto lenses like the 14 and in hindsight I definately would like to reverse my decision and be shooting ultra wide ultra sharp and ultra undistorted.

Another member mentioned the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14. I have read that it is a crap shoot with the quality control on these. Seen many used on the market but rarely a 14L and then it is only slightly lower than new price. The mustache distortion on the Korean 14 is alsomvery difficult to compensate for in post. On top of that who wants to only MF these days. I have a Zenitar 16mm 2.8 fisheye that rarely gets used because I find manually focus is difficult through the viewfinder and tedious with live view.

to each his own.  I own the samyang 14, and its absolutely great.  I would never buy the 14L II given its price to performance, and availability of samyang.  I also own the 16-35II, nikon 14-24, and canon 24-tseII and have owned the original 16-35, and 16-35II remains far and away my most used landscape lens.  I have printed a few 30x20 inch prints out of it, with excellent detail.

but then again, when I first started shooting landscape and using 16-35II, I was very often at 16, and found out I am cropping a lot in post, and now, I tend to use it at all its focal lenghts

 kevindar's gear list:kevindar's gear list
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Sony a7R II Sony a6300 +25 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads