Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Lens

16-35L is designed for full frame, ie you're paying a lot of money for a lens when you can't use half of its capability on crop format 7D, and miss out on focal length range.

17-55 2.8, with IS, is the obvious choice, and an excellent lens.
 
I can see it being a good combo if thats the focal length you require - its a good lens, and probably even better on a crop as you won't be using the edges.

Have you considered the tokina 16-50mm f2.8 as a cheaper alternative - never used it myself but have heard its pretty decent and it gives a little more reach.

Mike
 
pooley said:
I can see it being a good combo if thats the focal length you require - its a good lens, and probably even better on a crop as you won't be using the edges.

Have you considered the tokina 16-50mm f2.8 as a cheaper alternative - never used it myself but have heard its pretty decent and it gives a little more reach.

Mike
Click to expand...

That's what I thought but I guess it makes sense to use it on the full frame body.

Will look into that lens thought.
 
thebullet said:
I always add UV filters anyway, so that will be default.

Don't tempt me with a full frame, I love my 7D too much though! and for motorsport, crop is the right way to go.
Click to expand...

Don't use a UV filter if you value image quality.

If you get a bit of dust in a 17-55, a) it doesn't matter, and b) it takes 20 minutes to clean it yourself. I've done it - google :)
 
thebullet said:
I find this quite alot of money for it not to be a 2.8.
Click to expand...

There's only 1 wide/superwide zoom lens for crop sensors (that I'm aware of) that is F2.8 and that's the Tokina so options are limited if that's an absolute must :P

There's plenty of good quality lenses out there that aren't F2.8 so I wouldn't say it's a must. It offers more range than the Tokina which is why I picked the Canon 10-22mm instead but I guess that's up to you to decide
 
thebullet said:
I'd also like to add, as I am trackside alot of the time, rubbish from cars can come flying towards me, and really a UV filter is there to protect my lens.
Click to expand...

Then you need a protection filter if damage is a genuine danger.

There are a million threads on the merits or otherwise of protection filters, but even the best can and do degrade image quality in some situations. Main problem is flare spots and ghosting when there are bright lights in the frame, like street scenes at night, or sunsets, or if you were shooting a rally with bright headlights coming at the camera. Also poor sharpness with longer lenses with cheaper filters.
 
HoppyUK said:
Then you need a protection filter if damage is a genuine danger.

There are a million threads on the merits or otherwise of protection filters, but even the best can and do degrade image quality in some situations. Main problem is flare spots and ghosting when there are bright lights in the frame, like street scenes at night, or sunsets, or if you were shooting a rally with bright headlights coming at the camera. Also poor sharpness with longer lenses with cheaper filters.
Click to expand...

and most of us are shooting sunsets with the very worst possible thing in front of a lens - a few stacked non coated resin grad filters :cuckoo:. I mentioned this to Lee last year and they told me :thinking::cuckoo::wave:
A decent UV filter is nowhere near as bad as those and will be generally used in a lot more forgiving conditions.
 
I'd agree with the 16-35 2.8 . If I could afford it, I'd have it for a portrait lens. Hell, I'd have it for an all round lens for landscape also. I'm personally not too fond of ultra wide photos.
 
daugirdas said:
and most of us are shooting sunsets with the very worst possible thing in front of a lens - a few stacked non coated resin grad filters :cuckoo:. I mentioned this to Lee last year and they told me :thinking::cuckoo::wave:
A decent UV filter is nowhere near as bad as those and will be generally used in a lot more forgiving conditions.
Click to expand...

What did you expect Lee to say? Next time you shoot a sunset with a couple of stacked filters, see what it looks like without.

I'm just pointing out the drawbacks of having a protection filter permanently attached. If you're aware of them, and decide the grad effect or whatever is beneficial, then that's fine.

Most filter image quality issues are not visible through the viewfinder as they're mostly caused by reflections off the shiny surface of the sensor bouncing back off the rear of the filter, though you'll see them in live view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top