Shooting people with a 16-35... Any good ?

[Mokh24]

I am expecting my 16-35 to ship with my 5d3 soon... I never used a 16-35 and i am buying it for my honeymoon in italy...
My question is, is it a good idea to use the 16-35 to shoot my wife-to-be and myself to have a good landscape scene in the background or shall i stick with the 24-105 for people shots and use the 16-35 only for landscapes?
Any people shots are welcome especially @16mm.

Thanks

[1982chris911]

Knowing the issues with 17-40mm which was for some time my only lens on the 5d MK2 I would recommend to at least take a 24-70 or 24 -104 with you for portraits. The 70-200mm f2.8 IS 2 also makes a great portrait lens with tighter framing. However the frames with the wide angles  (17-40mm) look mostly too wide and not really nice as they are not focused on the ppl. in the frame.       

[Mokh24]

I still dont have too many lenses... I only had the 18-55 kit lens with my old xti and a 70-300 sigma, i just got the 24-105 and the 16-35 is on its on way... So that's it..

I actually WANT to show a lot of the background scene ( or else i would use the 24-105 for portraits)... But i wanna know is if I use the 16-35, will I get unacceptably distorted images when shooting people ?

[bycostello]

50-100mm the kind of focal length normally suggested for portrait work...

[1982chris911]

I still dont have too many lenses... I only had the 18-55 kit lens with my old xti and a 70-300 sigma, i just got the 24-105 and the 16-35 is on its on way... So that's it..

I actually WANT to show a lot of the background scene ( or else i would use the 24-105 for portraits)... But i wanna know is if I use the 16-35, will I get unacceptably distorted images when shooting people ?

The 17-40mm makes ppl look unnatural in most cases, used between 17-30mm. The 16-35 won't be different ... you can only achieve good results if the persons are not filling more than probably a third of the frame in the middle ...

[elflord]

I am expecting my 16-35 to ship with my 5d3 soon... I never used a 16-35 and i am buying it for my honeymoon in italy...
My question is, is it a good idea to use the 16-35 to shoot my wife-to-be and myself to have a good landscape scene in the background or shall i stick with the 24-105 for people shots and use the 16-35 only for landscapes?
Any people shots are welcome especially @16mm.

What you want to avoid is having the camera really close to the person / people in the shot. I doubt you'd need wider than 24mm for this kind of shot --if you go very wide and stand back a reasonable distance, the people in the shot will only fill a tiny portion of the frame.

[dturano]

I don't have any experience with that lens, but I was in a similar situation to you a few years back when I went on my honeymoon to spain.

I had the 7d and the sigma 10-20mm f/3.5, I also had a big Gorilla pod, I got some great shots with my wife and I and the scenery,  on close ups we were a little distorted but I was ok because my goal was to incorporate us and the background.  I don't have experience with it but I would think the distortion would be less with the 16-35 on a ff body.

I also had a 24-70 with me.  The 10-20mm got more use outdoors.

Take a few test shots when the new lens comes with local settings to get an idea if your happy with the results.

[TotoEC]

I am expecting my 16-35 to ship with my 5d3 soon... I never used a 16-35 and i am buying it for my honeymoon in italy...
My question is, is it a good idea to use the 16-35 to shoot my wife-to-be and myself to have a good landscape scene in the background or shall i stick with the 24-105 for people shots and use the 16-35 only for landscapes?
Any people shots are welcome especially @16mm.

Thanks

The ultra wide angle lens is never good for portrait work.  If you include people in your shoot, it either be too small or far.  If you bring them closer as your main subject, you will distort them in some ways you won't like.  You will definitely have problem balancing the subject and the background.  It will force you to compose your shot critically and this will 'slow' you down.  I don't think your bride will have patience standing still while you are composing the shoot.

Since you are on a honeymoon, you would be better off with your 24 - 105 lens

Enjoy!

[scottkinfw]

As a general rule, to avoid mid-face distortion it is best to avoid short focal length lenses.  Around 80mm and up on ff.  Disclaimer: I am not a portrait photographer.

I am expecting my 16-35 to ship with my 5d3 soon... I never used a 16-35 and i am buying it for my honeymoon in italy...
My question is, is it a good idea to use the 16-35 to shoot my wife-to-be and myself to have a good landscape scene in the background or shall i stick with the 24-105 for people shots and use the 16-35 only for landscapes?
Any people shots are welcome especially @16mm.

Thanks

The ultra wide angle lens is never good for portrait work.  If you include people in your shoot, it either be too small or far.  If you bring them closer as your main subject, you will distort them in some ways you won't like.  You will definitely have problem balancing the subject and the background.  It will force you to compose your shot critically and this will 'slow' you down.  I don't think your bride will have patience standing still while you are composing the shoot.

Since you are on a honeymoon, you would be better off with your 24 - 105 lens

Enjoy!

[telephonic]

Better stay away from ultra wides for portrait works. Overlarge nose, etc is not a rare case with such lenses.

If you want to include the background, give some good distance of your lady and the scenery. The background might be a little bit blurred, but if you have a beautiful lady to look at, the scenic background is a bonus. My $0.02

[RC]

50-100mm the kind of focal length normally suggested for portrait work...

Yip, to avoid distortion and unflattering results unless that is your intent.  The new wife probably won't like a big nose.   

[Mt Spokane Photography]

70-135mm is the traditional focal length with a FF camera for portraits.  The telephotos tend to flatten facial features rather than emphasing them.
 
The 85mm and 135mm lenses are wonderful for portraits.

[thesirren]

In no way is 16-35 strictly limited to landscapes, architecture and group shots. Obviously, if you shoot people upfront at the wider end, you would have a different kind of a portrait, but it still is a portrait ^_^

Here are some random shots of people taken by other people (stolen from google) with 16-35:



@ 26mm (first), 31mm (second; cropped), 20mm (third; cropped);





@35mm:



@16mm:


@16mm:

[IIIHobbs]

Mokh, I think what may not be obvious to you at the moment is the different field of view you are going to get using the 5DIII over your XTi.
Your 18-55 on the XTi was effectively a 28-85. Therefore the 24-105 with the 5DIII is going to be the lens you want for the Honeymoon. The 24-35 range will give you a great wide shot for Landscapes and the 85-105 range will capture great portraits. You will probably find yourself zoomed out or in, much less in the middle.
The speed of the 16-35 is certainly an advantage in dusk/dawn situations, but I think you will quickly realize, looking through the viewfinder, that it is not your go to lens for the use you describe. Besides, the 5DIII really shines in low light situations with the 24-105.

[kwwalla]

If used properly the 16-35 is an excellent lens for the kind of shots you want to take. I use one with a great deal of success and there are many professional event photographers who employ the use of this lens for several scenarios (portraits, group shots, etc...). Persoanlly I think it is a great choice for taking pictures of a couple while trying to capture the landscape as well! If using the widest focal lenghts, remember not to put your subjects too close to the frame edges (distortion). Enjoy this great lens!