Ian.Dobinson Offline Image Upload: Off
|
p.1 #19 · just got 17-40 some questions | |
rhorta wrote:
Esquire08 wrote:
The 16-35 is overkill for anything less than professional use.
On full frame I might agree, but on crop I have to disagree.
With a 1.6x crop you get a pretty conservative GP zoom 26 - 56 equivalent.
At 1.3x crop you start talking wide angle with a 21 - 47 equivalent. Still being in the standard range makes f/2.8 very convenient.
I don't regard 26-56/2.8 as useful for professionals only, far from it, it is pretty much a standard zoom, with little reach. The 17-55/2.8 IS being a better choice, although less wide.
YMMV though 
Ruy
Dont think Esquire was talking about the focal lenght but that 2.8 on a wide being overkill for the the extra $800.
Its all relative, if you want the better and can afford it then fine if you cant stretch/justify it then at least canon offers a cheaper alt which is still great.
Choice between the 16-35 and 17-55is on a crop then I would say the 17-55 and the tokina 11-16 2.8 which makes the conversion to FF alot harder to justify.
Edited on Sep 08, 2008 at 03:30 PM
|