Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · Lens Consolidation (17-40, 16-35MK1)
  
 
wcyd
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Lens Consolidation (17-40, 16-35MK1)


Camera: 5D MK1, 7D

I mainly shoot portrait for family, friends, street candid shots, and landscape when hiking. I intend to keep the 17-40 and sell the 16-35, because I don't feel that extra stop help a lot. I am not too picky on image quality to be honest, since my skill is obviously the limit at this stage. When taking portrait, even 2.8 does not give much stronger bokeh unless the subject is very close, which we don't want to do in general.

Can you give me any good reasons to keep the 16-35?

Another questions is, how much better to use 35/1.4L on 5D or 24/1.4 on 7D than to use the 16-35?, other than the obvious advantage of low light no flash situation? I am thinking about one of those if there is a good reason.

I also have a 24/TS-E MK1. Anyone use it on crops for environmental portraits?

My short tele portrait lens are 85/1.8 and 135/2. I am learning to use the 90/TS-E for portrait as well but the progress is slow...

The reason I sold my 70-200/2.8 is, I don't like big white tube. Too much attention.
Thanks!



Feb 04, 2012 at 05:35 AM
Photon
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · Lens Consolidation (17-40, 16-35MK1)


From what you've said, I don't see much reason for you to keep the 16-35. If you like the subject isolation you get with your 85 and 135 wide open, then you might like the 35L on the 5D and the 7D for portraits with a bit wider view of the subject, but still substantial background blur.


Feb 04, 2012 at 05:52 AM
Mike K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Lens Consolidation (17-40, 16-35MK1)


I sold the 16-35 I and purchased the 17-40 f4 as this copy of the 16-35 was not very satisfying. I used the 17-40 for many years for all applications including landscape with a 1DmkII. However when I changed bodies to a 5D mkII I became dissatisfied with the corner performance of the 17-40 and moved to primes for wide angle. Since many of your WA applications are people shots, I would imagine that the corner sharpness is simply a non issue and might even add to subject isolation

I also used to use a 24 TSE version 1 with my 1DmkII and found fine adjusting tilt to be murder using only the viewfinder. Even changing focusing screens and viewfinder aids was fruitless. The TSE version 1 optical performance was only OK, despite being an L lens. It would probably serve you best as a straight forward 24 mm prime. After using the magnified Live View of the 5DII, TSE use for landscape was a revelation, and the 24 TSE version II is a huge improvement in every way over the version I.



Feb 04, 2012 at 07:17 PM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Lens Consolidation (17-40, 16-35MK1)


wcyd wrote:
Can you give me any good reasons to keep the 16-35?


2.8: more light, precision AF (in theory).

Another questions is, how much better to use 35/1.4L on 5D or 24/1.4 on 7D than to use the 16-35?, other than the obvious advantage of low light no flash situation? I am thinking about one of those if there is a good reason.

Primes and zooms serve different purposes. Having said that, the primes will help you with BG seperation when doing full body shots. I use a flash most of the times with fast primes anyway. The AF assist light helps greatly and the fast aperture isn't a reason to dump my fill.



Feb 05, 2012 at 05:48 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password