Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens vs. Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    23

    Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens vs. Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

    Hi,

    So which one of these genuinely has better image quality and produces better images on a Crop Sensor - 600d or equivalent

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    576
    That's hard to say. They're both very sharp with good color and contrast. 17-55 has a couple of things going for it that the 16-35 doesn't.

    1. IS. VERY handy to have imo.
    2. 19mm more focal range. That may not be an issue if you already have a good 50mm prime.

    I guess it comes down to if you're going to stay with a crop sensor for the next year or two? I have a 7D and the 17-55mm.. been using that combo for almost exactly a year now and I'm absolutely happy with my choice. For what it's worth, when I do go for a FF (next tax season, most likely) I'll end up with the 16-35 and the 50 1.2.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    23
    Would you say that IS makes such a substantial difference?

  4. #4
    Administrator Sean Setters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,366
    Quote Originally Posted by JTPAIN View Post
    Would you say that IS makes such a substantial difference?
    It certainly doesn't hurt...

  5. #5
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    3,876
    Based on testing sites like photozone.de, and based on the fact that I have both the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 16-35mm f/2.8L II and have used them on my 7D, I'd say the 17-55mm delivers slightly better optical quality than the 16-35L on the crop sensor. Not a huge difference, but it's there. If you have both a crop and a FF camera, or if you need the weather sealing with a 7D, it would make sense to get the 16-35mm. If you're 'planning on going FF someday' get the lens that's best for the camera you have NOW - and in this case, that would be the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, IMO.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by JTPAIN View Post
    Would you say that IS makes such a substantial difference?
    It does for me. If you happen to be a shooter that takes 90% of your shots on a tripod, then probably not. I have a lot of use for it.

    Guess that's a question best answered by you and your shooting habits. I'm with John on this one. For a crop camera, the 17-55 is the better choice. It also holds it's value relatively well. If I needed quick cash I'm sure I could sell mine without much waiting for 700-800 without too much waiting. So if you ever make the jump to FF and decide to get the 16-35, you can sell the 17 to help with the purchase.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    576
    BTW, based on all of the threads you're starting, sounds like your photography game is about to go up a notch. Congrats!

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    23
    Thanks for the help - looks like, for now at leasts, the 17-55 is the best option.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    23
    I certainly hope it is!! - just raising funds and working out costs!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •