« on: July 18, 2012, 01:02:01 PM »
The 14L is a awesome prime but the 16-35 II is a better all purpose wide.
It's a shame canon hasn't made the 14-24L by now. It would render these previous two obsolete.
If your really serious on shooting wide, the new zeiss 15mm 2.8 is the best thing I've ever seen. Even better than the 14-24 Nikon but with a 3000$ price tag. If you want to go ultra-wide, why compromise?
+1. However, for an amateur, I'd go 17-40L if it's casual landscape photography. If you need it for other purposes, get the 16-35L. There is no reason to spend so much on a prime (the 14L) if you are an amateur, unless you have a deep pocket. However, I use the 16-35L for landscape because I also shoot low light indoor with it. If I didn't shoot low-light indoor, I'd have the 17-40L. Just my opinion.