p.17 #1 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
A 70-200 DO would not be an improvement over the present 70-200 f/2.8 IS lens. Granted, it might be a little shorter and lighter, but it would certainly give up image quality to the present lineup.
p.17 #3 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Maybe not the 16-35L, but the other lenses ARE very heavy ..... but like you said, there is a lighter/slower version on every one of them, so one can't really complain.
This poster is about the new 16-35L II so we should really focus our discussion on this lens.
hahr wrote:
i haven't heard any working pros complain about the weight of their most popular lenses; 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200/2.8L IS, 300/2.8L IS, and 400/2.8L IS. keep in mind that there are already f/4 alternatives for every one of those lenses if weight is an issue.
p.17 #4 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
since no one has this lens in their hands and we've already dissected the MTF charts, there isn't much else to do until the lens ships. speculating about DO lenses that pros don't need or want sure beats the pants off of complaining about the 50L.
p.17 #7 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I think the 50L might be cheaper becuase they're out of stock. I've heard of rumors that BH does this to get you to place an order anyway, to keep clients in the mix. It'd be interesting to see what the price is after they're in stock. Wonder how long it'll take the 16-35 to come down? Not that it's crazy overpriced as is, but it's always nice to get $200 off the original "lens craze" price.
p.17 #8 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
cineski wrote:
I think the 50L might be cheaper becuase they're out of stock. I've heard of rumors that BH does this to get you to place an order anyway, to keep clients in the mix. It'd be interesting to see what the price is after they're in stock. Wonder how long it'll take the 16-35 to come down? Not that it's crazy overpriced as is, but it's always nice to get $200 off the original "lens craze" price.
The 50L is in stock at B&H this morning.... As for Canon lens pricing, a rep at a large mail order operation recently told me that Canon doesn't tell dealers the dealer cost of the lens right away. So the dealer just makes an educated guess about their cost and then sets their pre-order price accordingly. That would be consistent with what we see on the 16-35 II and 1d-3 pricing: wide variation. I expect prices to even out once Canon has set the dealer price.
I'm interested in the 16-35 Mk II, but I'll wait for a while. Three reasons:
A) After the 'initial lens craze', the price will drop a bit.
B) Buying the first batch is very risky! The new 50L has major problems that Canon has yet to acknolwedge. (See also 70-300 and 24-105)
C) I would be selling my 16-35 Mk I. An upgrade of an existing lens causes the old model to take an initial dive during the 'lens craze' phase. After the rush to upgrade subsides, demand should level off.
There is a marked difference between the old and new 16--35L, especially at the edges. this is good news for FF shooters. For cropped-frame bodies, the difference is negligible - especially when compared to the 17-40L which appears to be quite an outstanding lens.
I have a 16-35 from about April of 2003. Never used on more than a 1.6 crop. Going to an 1.3 crop, it still appears that the Mark II won't buy much, maybe extreme corners but not edges. Of course back then who knows what the QC was doing.
I wanted to thank the poster for the valuable link.
p.17 #11 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
One of the best equipment decisions I've ever made was to stop using filters entirely. Saves a lot of money and hassle. It's also a lot easier to clean the front glass of the lens in my experience than a filter. Haven't had a scratch or mishap yet, knock on wood. Only thing I'm giving up anything with is a polarizer, but they're vastly overused anyways, imho.
p.17 #12 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
without a Polarizer you can do nothing for landscape most part of the time
if you want long exposure during the day you need a ND filter (or 2)
with a strong sun on tge sea I am using a gradual ND
if you want to do IR photography without havin an IR camera you need a filter too
p.17 #13 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Does anyone have any advice on some decent 82mm filters for this lens. i have pre-ordered this lens and just ordered the 82mm Lee adapter for this lens. However, I have been unable to find any 82mm Hoya Pro 1 Skylight filters anywhere.
Another option I considered was looking into the new Rodenstock HR filters that were introduced at PMA but have not been able to find anyone who carries the new filters (or any Rodenstock for that matter).
I did check with Singh-Ray and they are planning on adding 82mm filters to some of their filter line and will most likely purchase the LB color combo polarizer and possibly the LB warming polarizer.
However, for my general use Skylight and UV filters I prefer Hoya since they have have thinner mount for wide angle lenses, but still have front filter threads to accept the Lee filter hood (so that I can use my ND grads).
B+W and heliopan and Singh-Ray do make thin mount filters, but Hoya is the only one I know of that has front filter threads.
p.17 #14 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I think that you will find that this lens, with an 82mm thread, will work fine with normal size filters with no need for thin unless you are stacking, and I wouldnt do that regardless.
The manufacturers have woken up the filter issue and are putting wider threads to combat this.
Do you see canon releasing a Push on cap for their 82mm Clear filter? Nope.
When you get the lens, take it to the nearest store and try a 82mm UV, with a 5mm thick ring ( or Circ pol with 7mm ring), and I think we will find that it wont vignette.
I may be wrong on this one but I think that I am correct.
cheers
p.17 #17 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
hartgebm wrote:
I think that you will find that this lens, with an 82mm thread, will work fine with normal size filters with no need for thin unless you are stacking, and I wouldnt do that regardless.
The manufacturers have woken up the filter issue and are putting wider threads to combat this.
Do you see canon releasing a Push on cap for their 82mm Clear filter? Nope.
When you get the lens, take it to the nearest store and try a 82mm UV, with a 5mm thick ring ( or Circ pol with 7mm ring), and I think we will find that it wont vignette.
I may be wrong on this one but I think that I am correct.
cheers...Show more →
I hope you are right, but i wouldn't base this on canon not including a push-on cap with their clear filter. From what i understand most canon filters (at least the one's available in N. america) are crap and are made by Tiffen.
p.17 #20 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Having a Sigma 100-300/4.0 (an 82mm mount) I'm good.
Did you go B+W or HOYA. The 82mm which I currently have is the HOYA Pro-1.
It may be awhile before I can jump on this lense as yesterday I ordered up a Canon 10X42 L IS WP pair of binoculars and then later this year, it'll be a new ASUS, dual-core MoBo w/3-gigs of memory for the added Photoshop processing speed and the newly announced, but yet to be released, Canon PIXMA Pro9500 ten ink printer. Yippee!
Looking forward to the 16-35L II being released and salivating over all the expected good reviews.
