16-35 = 24-70?

[Jon Ruyle]

I won't tell you which focal length you should use, but if you go wide, I definitely agree with those who suggest an EF-s lens rather than a wide EF lens. When you buy a lens like the 16-35, you're paying a premium (in weight and often in quality as well as dollars) for a lens that can cover the whole 36mm frame. In other words, similar EF-s lens will be cheaper, lighter, and probably better.

[Jon Ruyle]

I should add that I'm not just saying that because Mark has an EF-S 17-55 for sale []

[Mark Elberson]

I should add that I'm not just saying that because Mark has an EF-S 17-55 for sale [img]/emoticons/emotion-1.gif[/img]



<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

It wasquite serendipitous though!

[Charlie]

Thank you everyone for your feedback.


I do have the 16-35 (by accident- long story!) but its unopened as I decide whether to keep it.


I've certainly been leaning towards returning it but one last option was to use it now as an equivalent to the 24-70 portrait (didn't know how successful that would be) and also as a walk around lens and then down the line as a wide angle on a full frame body.


I think there's better options though.


Thanks again.

[Bombsight]

Let me know if you want to sell that 16-35.[]

[tancanon58]

I thought 16-35 is UWA lens and 24-70 is a midrange. Both are perfect matched with FF like 1Ds series , 5Dc and 5D2.

[Charlie]

Let me know if you want to sell that 16-35.[img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]

Sorry Bombsight. I returned the 16-35 a few days ago![]


Best wishes.

[form]

The 17-55 IS is a far better substitute for the 24-70L if you have a crop sensor camera. Less expensive, sharper optics, and IS.





The 16-35L II is the least impressive Canon lens I ever bought (and returned immediately). Horrible corners, no better center sharpness at 16mm than my Sigma 10-20 at similar apertures, and very expensive. Buy the Tokina 11-16 if you want the best in ultra-wide for crop sensors. Buy the 17-55 IS if you want the best standard zoom for crop sensors.