Beginner Canon 16-35

Nigel Jennings

Nigel Jennings

Messages
33
Name
Nigel Jennings
Edit My Images
Yes
hi all
I am upgrading my wide angle lens, I am looking at the Canon 16-35, my question is do I go for the f4 or the f2.8 iii
I want it for Landscape mainly, but want to try some astrophotography
 
I can't comment on astrophotography, but having recently started using the 16-35 f4 for landscape I'm very pleased with it. The lighter weight of the f4 was the deciding factor for me when choosing the lens, the cost difference played a part too.

I expect the astro guys appreciate the large aperture of the f2.8.

Chris
 
I’ve had an F4 for about a year now and really pleased with it... really excellent lens for interiors and landscape.
 
This f4 knocks spots of all but the F2.8 mk3 and even then it’s still slightly sharper in the corners. It’s lighter, cheaper and has is. No vignetting and very little barrel distortion.
If it moves a lot get the f2.8 mk3 if it doesn’t get the f4...
 
The f4 was my first choice, I just wanted to ask the question before I bought it. I was looking at the 14mm samyang for Astrophotography
 
Hi Nigel the f4 is great for wide landscapes. Definitely worth looking at Samyang for a separate Astro lens. I have the 24 1.8 on FF and it produces very good results wide open. Probably the two together is cheaper than the 2.8 zoom.
 
If money is important then have you thought about the 17-40 f/4 L . Now before 16-35 L fans start screaming things like 'no comparison', 'different league', etc. just have a look at some of the comparison reviews/tests between these lenses and have a careful look at the photos from the 17-40 L taken at f/8 or above.

Then ask yourself what aperture range you are most likely to be using as a landscape photographer. Then ask yourself what is the price difference between a mint second hand 17-40 f/4 L (there's plenty about to choose from - probably around the £400 mark for a mint one from a reputable retailer with a few months guarantee) and one of the latest 16-35 L variants (either mint used or new). Then ask yourself how much you use the super-wide zoom range offered by these lenses? Then (this is the last ask!) can you make good use of the money you'd save if you went for the 17-40 L?

The choice is very much yours, but maybe weigh up your options and do some research? If money were no object I would personally go for one of the 16-35 L options, but as it isn't and I don't use that lens range every day, then I'm sticking with the absolutely mint, boxed, 17-40 L that I bought from a camera shop for £399 just after Christmas last year for a while longer yet! Hope this is useful and I wish you the best of luck choosing and enjoying the right lens for you. (y)
 
Last edited:
I had a 17-40 on my Canon 6D and it was superb. Edge to edge sharp but the reviews tell you they aren't.

I may have had a good one.
 
Can’t deny the 17-40 is a really good lens, I had one for quite a few years but I borrowed a mates 16-35 f4 and decided straight away to get one as soon as I could. I must admit I don’t use it much above f8. The IS is really useful and gives great results at around a 1/10th and it also handles quite a bit of flare very well. The only way really is to actually try them yourself. Maybe go to something like an LCE canon day in your area.
 
Last edited:
Personally I would buy a separate lens for the astrophotography. From my experience I had the 17-40L F4 and it was fine, but upgraded to the 16-35 F4 which I found far superior albeit on my Canon 5Ds. My one regret was going to Iceland and using the 17-40 F4 lens instead of renting a better lens for night work which just wasn't good enough and far too long exposures with high ISO.
I have since bought the Samyang 24 F1.4 and for the very limited amount of astro I do, I find it a far better compromise although if money its the deal breaker, then why not keep the 17-40 L and invest in a better astro lens? As mentioned above, do you really need the F2.8?
 
I had the same dilemma, went for the16-35 f4 and haven't regretted it. I did buy a separate lens (24mm f1.8 sigma) for astro stuff, but the 16-35 did a cracking job on a night shoot in town on Saturday night and I have used it for star trails before
 
I have both the Canon 16-35mm 2.8 & the 14mm Samyang and have great results with both when shooting Aurora on my Canon 6D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top