Register · Search · Software · Join Upload & Sell · Hosting

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews
FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell   
Search Used
1
   2   end
   

Archive 2009 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?
  
 
hsk06
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Ok, I impulsively bought a 16-35mm f2.8L from Beach Camera before the price jumped last week.

Sadly, I haven't even opened the box yet. I've hardly taken any landscape pictures, and you can tell from my flickr page. I mean NONE.


Now someone please show me some nice pictures taken with the 16-35mm so that i can get excited, open the box.

In other words, what is the 16-35mm good for beside landscape?
Thanks in advance.
Oct 16, 2009 at 07:48 AM
anorphirith
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


>>IMO<<
16-35mm is only good for indoor wide angle and low light shots (church), otherwise for landscapes you'll never need faster than f/4
that's why I got the 17-40mm f/4
Oct 16, 2009 at 07:58 AM
LightShow
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


on my 40D:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/808142/0#7463574

It's one of my favorite lenses, I can't wait to use it on a FF body.

Oct 16, 2009 at 08:03 AM
hsk06
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


anorphirith,
now that you mention Church. Yes, the wide end would made nice pics of the whole church view.
If i stay at the back of the church, shooting at 16mm, f2.8 of the whole church, do the pics have enough dof (since most of the fov is at infinity)?

I took this pic with my former combo: 1dsii+24-105 at 24mm, 1/20, f4, iso 400:


This image is copyrighted by the owner
Oct 16, 2009 at 08:14 AM
Emile Gregoire
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Don't have any pics available, but IMHO the 16-35 excels at indoor events on a 1.3 crop camera. That is its first line of duty for me. The fact that it can do landscapes, cityscapes and architecture as well is a plus but not a deciding factor as the 17-40 can do this equally well.

Oct 16, 2009 at 12:33 PM
RobertLynn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


I'll put it to you this way.

Until a lens comes out that beats the holy hell out of my f/2.8 trinity, I won't be selling any of them. Of my 3 zooms, my 16-35 is my least used, but when it gets the shot, I remember why I spent 954 after tax on it used (Mk1)

Oct 16, 2009 at 12:35 PM
dimitris77
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Just stop being lazy and take some shots.

Oct 16, 2009 at 12:56 PM
ShaneEngelking
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


This may give you an idea.






  Canon EOS 5D    16 mm    f/5.6    1/125 sec    400 ISO    0.0 EV  








  Canon EOS 5D    23 mm    f/4.0    1/100 sec    400 ISO    0.0 EV  








  Canon EOS 5D    16 mm    f/2.8    1/800 sec    200 ISO    0.0 EV  

Oct 16, 2009 at 01:04 PM
ShaneEngelking
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


anorphirith wrote:
>>IMO<<
16-35mm is only good for indoor wide angle and low light shots (church), otherwise for landscapes you'll never need faster than f/4
that's why I got the 17-40mm f/4


Unless you want to blur out a bit of the background, in which case the 2.8 REALLY helps.






  Canon EOS 5D    35 mm    f/2.8    1/320 sec    400 ISO    0.0 EV  

Oct 16, 2009 at 01:14 PM
OntheRez
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Shane,
That third shot in the cornfield is a beauty. Nice eye. To the OP, I had a 17-40 and sold it planning on getting the 16-35 but haven't gotten it done yet. Two reasons the exchange, the extra stop gets you all sorts of possibilities one of which Shane has illustrated above. Second, wide angle /= landscape. It also means wider, broader view. One more millimeter of width is quite significant down on this end. I'm still looking for a used one. They are hard to find.

Robert

Oct 16, 2009 at 01:38 PM
 



ShaneEngelking
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Thanks, OntheRez.

Oct 16, 2009 at 01:43 PM
veroman
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?




This image is copyrighted by the owner





This image is copyrighted by the owner





This image is copyrighted by the owner





This image is copyrighted by the owner




- Steve

Oct 16, 2009 at 01:47 PM
ShaneEngelking
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Beautiful work, Veroman, esp. #1

Oct 16, 2009 at 02:04 PM
Kevin Sherman
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Hey, if you don't want it ;-)

This lens is on the top of my 'get next' list, especially now that I have the 7D. Need some wide glass now that I plan to sell off my 5D.

Oct 16, 2009 at 02:08 PM
veroman
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


ShaneEngelking wrote:
Beautiful work, Veroman, esp. #1

Thanks. Yes, #1 is one of my all-time favorites. I used only 1 support light (continuous), a 600-watt Lowell with a gel. The rest is all ambient plus the lighting in the rooms (mostly tungsten) ... and a decent amount of post-processing of course. Camera is the 1Ds II for that one; 5D Mark 1 for the others (I think).

- Steve

ADDED: Nope ... third one is 1Ds II as well.
Oct 16, 2009 at 02:44 PM
ShaneEngelking
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


veroman wrote:
ShaneEngelking wrote:
Beautiful work, Veroman, esp. #1

Thanks. Yes, #1 is one of my all-time favorites. I used only 1 support light (continuous), a 600-watt Lowell with a gel. The rest is all ambient plus the lighting in the rooms (mostly tungsten) ... and a decent amount of post-processing of course. Camera is the 1Ds II for that one; 5D Mark 1 for the others (I think).

- Steve

ADDED: Nope ... third one is 1Ds II as well.


Thanks for the info.

Oct 16, 2009 at 02:46 PM
tell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


16-35 is on my list also. You needed to correct for lens distortion on these didn't you?

veroman wrote:
ShaneEngelking wrote:
Beautiful work, Veroman, esp. #1

Thanks. Yes, #1 is one of my all-time favorites. I used only 1 support light (continuous), a 600-watt Lowell with a gel. The rest is all ambient plus the lighting in the rooms (mostly tungsten) ... and a decent amount of post-processing of course. Camera is the 1Ds II for that one; 5D Mark 1 for the others (I think).

- Steve

ADDED: Nope ... third one is 1Ds II as well.
Oct 16, 2009 at 03:06 PM
veroman
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


tell wrote:
16-35 is on my list also. You needed to correct for lens distortion on these didn't you?

If you're referring to my images, no. My copy has very low distortion. It also went through Canon's service department for critical adjusting and calibration at one point. When it came back to me it was like a new, different, better lens than I had before sending it in. Really ... night and day difference. They did a great job (Jamesburg, NJ facility).

The only lens in my arsenal that I have to seriously correct for barrel distortion is my 24-105. When I use it for interior work (which I often do), I generally don't shoot it any wider than 35-40mm.

- Steve
Oct 16, 2009 at 03:14 PM
mikethevilla
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


No. You don't need it. Send it to me and I'll properly dispose of it.

Some examples using my dad's 16-35:



This image is copyrighted by the owner






This image is copyrighted by the owner






This image is copyrighted by the owner






This image is copyrighted by the owner




All fullframe.

Oct 16, 2009 at 03:25 PM
tell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · 16-35mm f2.8L Do I really need it?


Wow. I'm amazed at the lack of distortion. The verticals are just about perfectly straight from edge to edge. The little bit of tilt there is looks natural. Thanks for sharing.
Tell

veroman wrote:
tell wrote:
16-35 is on my list also. You needed to correct for lens distortion on these didn't you?

If you're referring to my images, no. My copy has very low distortion. It also went through Canon's service department for critical adjusting and calibration at one point. When it came back to me it was like a new, different, better lens than I had before sending it in. Really ... night and day difference. They did a great job (Jamesburg, NJ facility).

The only lens in my arsenal that I have to seriously correct for barrel distortion is my 24-105. When I use it for interior work (which I often do), I generally don't shoot it any wider than 35-40mm.

- Steve
Oct 16, 2009 at 03:27 PM
1
   2   end
FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell

1
   2   end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

  Username   Password  
Lost your password?