unsure what lens to get, please help ;)

[mzemljic]

My best friend asked me once...


What to by 17-40 or 16-35?


Here is what I answered like a friend.


If You ask what to by between 17-40 f4 & 16-35 f2,8 is the same as You ask, do I need an 5 years old Mercedes Benz SL 220 HP or a Brand new Mercedes SL 320 HP!!!


In my personal opinion as a full time pro I can say this...


I am not used to make compromise between older (17-40) and newer (16-35), cheaper or more expensive... So my Clients can always get "The Best" for their money!


I will never say 17-40 f4 L is not good inough (I have used one before for nature)but 16-35 f2,8 L II is certainly much better! Double the price and You get what You pay for.


I have 15fish, 50f1.4, 85f1.2 L II 135f2 L 24-70f2.8 L, 70-200f2.8 L IS and finaly 16-35 f2.8 L II.


I have always tought I have inough...There is 15 and there's 24-70 in my bag, but 16-35 f2.8 L II is totaly diferent from 24-70 and 17-40 not to mention fisheye.


And If You by EF-S 17-55 now regardless to a "EF-S17-55IS" built and lens quality,


and a year from now You ll get or wish a full frame body You' ll have to sell it for 24-70 or 24-105...


So, my guess is always go with full frame lenses like 17-40 or 16-35 because they're bought perform excellent and one day You'll use them a lot.


17-40 f4 L on fujifilm 200 example


http://flickr.com/photos/mattassano/3214603859/


16-35 f2,8 L II with 1Ds mk III example


http://flickr.com/photos/mattassano/3268101470/


Best Regards,

[marie d]

You guys have been awesome in helping me.. i thank you all kindly. I have been reading and re-reading and studying your threads and all the reviews you have suggested. This morning i have decided to go with the 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM, I’m calling my camera shop today as they have one 16-35 in stock so I’m going to have them put it aside for me and I’ll be taking that 3 hour drive in a couple of days to pick it up. So next will be a new full frame body.. any suggestions. I might be able to make that purchase sooner than i had thought. I’m excited to get a brand new make over. The 1Ds mark III and 1D mark III are big... the 5D and 50D are full frames also right. Could you give me a hand again please. I really have learned a lot from your threads.

[mzemljic]

I am glad for You!


Full frame? Nice...


To be sure You know what a Full Frame stands for...


In 1925, German "Leica" was original founder of a so called 35 mm or a small format system, and, it was most used film format till today by journal and wedding photographers.


The system was named 35, small format, or Leica format after it was originally standard 35 mm Cinema film with extensions 24x36 cm.


And after 77 yearsof use by photographers all over the globe it was successfully replaced with todays full frame D-SLR with the same measures of sensor as it was film in these days.


Why? Because of all advantages of 35mm film over APS-C sensors !!!


One of the biggest reasons were "DOF" and Crop factor on wide angle lenses in my opinion.


So now we have Canon;


5D & 5DII, top wanted fullframe DSLR-s along withPro fullframe bodies like 1Ds, 1DsII & Todays top of the line1DsIII with 45 focus points, weather sealed body, 22 Mpix, 300000 cycles shutter durability...


Canon 50D is Not a full frame!!!


It has 1,6 * smaller sensor size then a Fullframe DSLR24x36mm, so 24mm (I guess 90 degrees) lens would be similar to a 38mm lens !


24mm * 1,6 (smaller senssor size then the 24x36 film or fullframe sensor ) = 38.4 mm


Once again, Best Regards

[mark]

wow all these responses and no one suggested the EF-s 10-22 ... if you are looking to take WIDE landscapes then at this time there is no better lens ...in my opinion for just this the Canons EF-S 10-22 ...on a crop body it the same perpective as a 16-34 ... as wide as one can get without going fish eye ... i have one for just the same purpose as you wish to use your ... yes i do agree the 17-55 is a great lens but will at the end of the day be no wider then the 17-85 you currently own ... and there you have one more thing to consider ... 10-22 AS WIDE AS YOU WILL FIND





cheers

[Dann Thombs]

HiFi: That photo was taken at the minimum working distance (1:1) and wide open. Since it was perpendicular the DoF wasn't much of an issue, so I was able to use that to get the rest of the picture creamy.

[Rob Gardner]

Here's my concern: the 16-35 (as well as 24-70) is a heavy lens that really throws off the balance of body/lens with a Rebel XTi. Since you haven't upgraded your body yet, why not start with a 20mm 2.8 prime? It's light, reasonably inexpensive, and fully full-frame compatible, giving it a long life in your camera bag. Used examples are easily found on eBay for under $250 - and its a very sharp lens. In any event, whatever lens you get, try to adapt to using a monopod at least for your travels. Small, light, and easy to carry, a monopod makes all the difference in your shots.