hi guys! I
hi guys! I
I have both
I like the 16-35mm over the 24-70. It just seems to be a better lens.
What do you plan on using the lenses for?Do you have a full-frame or crop camera?I think with a little more background we could give you better feedback.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but really the biggest difference between these two lenses is the zoom range. Both are going to give superb pictures.
- Trowski
If you have nothing wider than 50 currently, first I
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
I
thanks guys! I
Given that, I'd say the 24-70mm f/2.8L is your best bet. The 16-35mm is definitely too wide/short for a walkaround lens on a FF body.
Originally Posted by cxr
Maybee I have a bad copy of the 24-70mm. I do alot of large prints and my copy just never delivered. I sent it in for warranty work once but it still performs the same. Alot of people really like this lens, maybee if I had a diffrent copy I would to. The 24-70 range is really good for everyday use.
My 16-35L has produced alot of really nice pictures, it is wide. It really depends on what you are concider everyday use if it would work for you or not. My walk around lens is a 35mm F1.4L and before I got it I usualy had the 16-35L on my camera when I went out. The 16-35mm may be to wide for you, thats a question you can only answer.
My camera is a 5D Mark II as well.
@ HDNitehawk - how do you find the 35mm f1.4 L on the 5D Mark II? I know the zoom lens will be versatile but I