Gear Talk > Lenses
Wide Canon L choice: 14L II 2.8 or 16-35 II 2.8
AndreiD:
Hello people,
Been lurking around this site watching various posts from time to time. I got a new 5d mark iii and my current lens set-up consists in a 24-105 (kit lens from my mk ii), 50L, 100-400L. I'm thinking of buying a wider lens than what can offer the 24-105 at the widest setting.
So which one would you recommend if any? Or stick to the 24?
PS: I'm amateur (ie i don't make money out of this).
Cheers
neuroanatomist:
14L is a specialist lens - it's challenging to compose shots and have them succeed (just 'wide' isn't usually visually impactful). When they do, it's great, though.
The 16-35L II is a versatile lens, great as a UWA lens.
What do you plan to shoot? If you will be using it for static subjects like landscapes, the 17-40mm is not bad when stopped down to f/8-11 (not too different from the 16-35 II at those narrow apertures), and it's a lot cheaper.
Personally, I chose the 16-35 II and I'm quite happy with it.
AndreiD:
--- Quote from: neuroanatomist on July 18, 2012, 10:23:43 AM ---14L is a specialist lens - it's challenging to compose shots and have them succeed (just 'wide' isn't usually visually impactful). When they do, it's great, though.
The 16-35L II is a versatile lens, great as a UWA lens.
What do you plan to shoot? If you will be using it for static subjects like landscapes, the 17-40mm is not bad when stopped down to f/8-11 (not too different from the 16-35 II at those narrow apertures), and it's a lot cheaper.
Personally, I chose the 16-35 II and I'm quite happy with it.
--- End quote ---
Hello
Thanks for your reply. I'll be shooting mostly landscapes and scenery. Yeah i see that the 14 is a heck of a lot more expensive. The same can be said between what you recommended the 17-40 and the 16-35, half the price!
The thing is the 17-40 has the largest aperture in 4 as the same 24-105, case in which the sole gain in paying for another lens is the difference between 24 to wider 17mm. Correct?
RunAndGun:
I played with both lenses from CPS before I purchased. I own the 16-35. It's a more versatile lens and honestly I think you'll get more use out of it than the 14mm. The 14mm is kind of a niche/specialty lens. I LOVE shooting WA stuff and that's why I bought the 8-15mm, but even I don't pull it out THAT much because it's not for everything(same for the 14mm). I'm not saying it's not a god lens or a FUN lens, but after the newness wears off, I don't think it will get used nearly as much as the 16-35mm.
neuroanatomist:
--- Quote from: AndreiD on July 18, 2012, 10:29:19 AM ---The thing is the 17-40 has the largest aperture in 4 as the same 24-105, case in which the sole gain in paying for another lens is the difference between 24 to wider 17mm. Correct?
--- End quote ---
Well, yes...but the difference between 24mm and 17mm is a big difference...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version