I currently am shooting on a 5D mark II with a 24-70mm and a 70-200 2.8. I am shooting a wedding for a friend next week and have another shoot where I need a wide angle in a church. I am scheduled to meet a guy after several communications on Craigslist for a 16-35mm 2.8 for $950(local pick up) mk I. Is that the right lens? I planned on renting the lens for the shoots but figured since I am getting paid, I might as well put the money. I know this has been debated and I really trust FM and appreciate your guys advice. I figure this lens will be a part of my kit for a long time. Please help!
10-22mm is an EF-S lens for APS-C bodies, you can mod it to work on 5D II but won't be plug and play.
So, your choice would be down to 16-35 or 17-40 on 5D II. Do you need the extra stop for the indoor? Is flash photography allowed inside the Church? Or will flash interfere with the video crew?
jwin, thanks for the reminder that I have been doing a lot of video with my 50mm 1.4 planar Zeiss. So, I will be doing a lot of video too. A lot of churches do not allow flash and I am leaning more towards the 16-35mm MkI. For only 300 or so more it seems like the right choice. Still wondering if I am missing something.
I have the version ll of the 16-35 and love it. If the first version is close in quality, (I don't know what the differences are other than the 82mm filter size on the ll) it sounds like a great buy. I find it to be a very useful range for indoor shots on my 5D2.
I personally would stay away from 16-35L Version 1 as there are a lot of bad copies out there. As a matter of fact, there are also a lot of so-so copies of Version II, especially the earlier ones. If you want a 16-35L I would advise that you get a new one ... so you can return it for another copy if you find it a little soft.
I don't have a 16-35L II right now. I settled for a 17-40L + 24L II instead. What I like about the 17-40L is that I can use my 77mm CPL and Variable ND filter ... that will also fit my 24L and 70-200L II.
A 1635mm f/2.8 lens would be incredible! Call it a NASA telescope!
In all seriousness, I'd go try out that 16-35mm and see if its a decent copy. Then ask $800 for it in 'cash-money'.
I have the 10-22mm for use on my 7D and the 16-35mm I to use on my 5D II. I tried the 17-40 and the 16-35mm II but came back to the 16-35mm I. I like the consistent filter size, 77mm, with my other L lenses and, at least with my copies, little difference in image quality.
I agree with the $800 price. I bought a nearly new 16-35mm I, boxed as new as well, for $850 including shipping and paypal fees. $950 sounds pretty steep to me.
That sounds pretty good, getting the 16-35 version 1. Check it out on your camera and make sure it is properly working. Try to get the price a little lower, $950 is about the upper end for a used version. New version II with warranty will be $500 more (or less if there is rebate). Version II is better, but version 1 was a big improvement over the 17-35L. Version II improves the peripheral sharpness and vignetting.
I have owned both. first off, the proper etiquette is doing your price negotiation before hand, as you have done. this happened to me once, when I met with someone, who said he is interested in a lens, and then offered me less, and really pissed me off, b/c it was a total waste of my time.
Back to the lenses. 16-35 1 is a great wedding lens. 16-35II has better corners, esp on the wide end, which should be of no consequence for your application. the version 1 may be even marginally better wide open on the long end (28-35). I think the extra stop is very useful for indoor weddings. as for copy variations, I only owned one copy and it was very good.
Tokina 16-28 is another option, bigger and heavier, and more limited range, and a protruding front element. definitely will be sharper wide open in the corners. in the center, on a 5d2, not sure if there would be any visible difference. It is also subject to QC variations according to every review I read.
Kevin -- I guess I should clarify about the negoitating prices -- I agree, do so before you sit down to conduct the transaction. I don't agree with jacking people around or putting them in an extortion type of spot. But it might be gotten slightly lower from this seller or another. Still, a good copy is certainly worth that price.
Gunzorro, price is always negotiable. my comment was not directed at you, it was directed at skyisland, but again, thats simply my opinion. the price of 16-35II is down with the rebates that can drive price of version I down also. I sold mine for 910 with a uv date code, and it was a good copy. that was 1.5 years ago. since I have seen as much as 1100 asked for one on FM, but that was when the 16-35II was running at 1650. the op can do his research in terms of what is a good price for this lens. It is certainly not unreasonable to tell the seller that 800 or 825 is the most I am willing to pay. Its just not fair to jerk people around. he may have other buyers, everyones time should be respected.
