I've often wondered what the real advantage of a 24mm apsc sensor is. But this lens hits it right on the head. Previously, I'd look at, say 16-50/f2.8 cropped lenses and wondered why they were almost the same price as a 24-70/2.8 full-frame lens, still took 77mm filters, etc. And so, what's their size advantage really? But this little ultra-wide tells the story of the apsc advantage. For 300 bucks, you can have the same focal range as the new 16-35. And you get it for one-quarter (one quarter!) of the price, almost one-third the weight, and pretty much all of the image quality. Yeah it's not as well crafted, and it has tighter apertures, but for an ultra-wide, where it counts – image quality at middle apertures – it's apparently close enough.

I still love the look of my full-frame images (they are different) and you can't match the viewfinder, which impacts every photo taken. But for travel, hiking, easy of use it seems that an SL1 and one of these babies is the cat's meow. If Canon only kept pace with Nikon with, say, a 35mm 1.8 for cropped sensor, they'd be getting somewhere.

i guess i'm in disagreement with most people here on what lenses to buy. if you know that you're going to FF later on, then get FF compatible lenses - that's what i did and i couldn't be happier.

with EF-S lenses, you're probably not going to get much when you resell them, and they also might be hard to sell. it depends on where you live and whether or not you want to deal with ebay, but it won't be as easy as most people think it is.

if you're not getting a FF for like 4 years, then definitely get EF-S lenses, or you'll be unhappy for a long time. if you're planning on upgrading soon, then get the big boy L's and save yourself the cash in the long-run.

finally, get them used if you can. most L lenses are built extremely well, and buying them used can save you a ton of cash (i got the 85L ii for about $1,000 US). if it's a complicated lens (zoom and IS) then you might want to go new, but basic primes are usually in "perfect real-world" conditions when you get them used.

orrokinawa said:

Picked up my copy of the 16-35 yesterday, did a few test shots between it and my 24mm TS. So far I am pleasantly thrilled with the purchase, I no longer have the 17-40 to compare it to, but after I purchased the 24mm TS a couple years back the 17-40 sat in the cabinet to never be used again until I sold it a few weeks back.

Here are few images the first being the left 100% crop of the 16-35, second being a 100% crop of the 24mm TS, shifted to the left. The third a shot into the sun and palm to evaluate CA, I couldnt find any CA and limited flare.

Shooting at the horizon barrel distortion was minimal very happy with the purchase, great lens overall.

Click to expand...

Lens looks fantastic overall. Only criticism is f/4 obviously, and looking at your sun photo I prefer the 16-35 II sunburst over the 16-35 f/4 IS. 18 points is too many IMO.

I've had a closer look at the Godox ving and it appears that the battery is actually quite powerfull cell at 2000mAh and 11.1V. This means that it needs a lot less work than a standard set of AA to have the tension rised to a level high enough for the flash (300V-400V). Then it might not be as bad as I first thought.

May be the 850 manually controlled flash at about 100$ and spare batteries at 30$ can be an interesting buy after all.

Got it!

Due to a tiny engineering anomaly, the Godox ProPac Cx cable (for Canon EX flash) will not plug into the Quantum battery, but the Quantum CZ-2 cable will plug into the Godox PB-960 battery.

-pw

Hello Friends,

This Lens is available now in India at all major canon dealers past 1 week.

MRP is 78K INR , ask your dealer for discount.

http://www.canon.co.in/personal/products/interchangeable-lens-camera/lenses?languageCode=EN

Lens 10-18mm is also available now.

thanks

Anil George

StudentOfLight said:

The Sony Vests have more dynamic range ;D

Click to expand...

I've also heard they make less noise than canon vests. : : :

wickidwombat said:

SpartanII said:

Hopefully Sigma will now produce lenses for the M. I thought it was interesting with the timing of this release in that Canon released its telephoto zoom just 48 hours prior approx.

If the quality of the lens at least on par with the quality of the EF-M 18-55mm, I think many will be on board with Tamron's super zoom offering.

Click to expand...

id be interested to see what a sigma 18-35 f1.8 in native EF-M mount would be like
the size difference between the rokinon EF-S 8mm and the EF-M 8mm is massive just as an example

Click to expand...

That would be awesome. I do wonder though if this would make the M a not so portable camera with a 1.8 maximum aperture lens. On second thought, if the EF-M 22mm f/2.0 exists, it shouldn't be that difficult to produce a smaller, lighter 18-35mm f/1.8 sacrificing portability.

tnargs said:

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:

I simply don't agree with this bolded part AT ALL. The bokeh on the 100L is beautifully soft and creamy and the rounded aperture blades ensure that the highlights stay round when stopped down. The bokeh from the 50mm f1/.4 isn't even close.

Click to expand...

Totally agree!

Click to expand...

The 50mm f1.4 USM's out of focus rendering is a little harsh compared to the 50 f1.2 L's
I've found the 100mm f2.8 L Macro lens to be very smooth in it's out of focus rendering too, although no better than most tele L lenses. The 135L and 85IIL spring to mind.

As to the 100mm f2.8 L Macro's AF speed, it's fast for a macro lens, but slow for a L lens.

gbchriste said:

Now, I just confirmed that if I attach the flash, set the shutter synch, then dismount the flash and hook it up to my Cyber Sync trigger, the second curtain sync that was previously set will work as expected.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why but this is not the case with my 5DMKIII and Pocket Wizards. Once I pulled the 650EX-RT off camera it returns to first curtain synch.

I have Canon 50mm F1.4 and 35mm F2 IS also. In practice, 50mm F1.4 becomes more darker. ??? To achieve the same sharpness in the corners and level of chromatic aberration LOCAS, I have to stop down 50mm to F2.5. On the other hand, 35mm F2 IS has sharpness and CA well controlled even when wide open at F2.

Good advice to disassemble the transmitter to access the inside of the shoe. However, according to the position of the screws, you can break the transmitter that is cheaper to send to Canon autorized service.

.
Oops.

Thought this was a review.

privatebydesign said:

tayassu said:

That makes a 1,2-1,5 stop difference and that is great, considering age and sensor differences. I'm totally happy with the HighISO performance of my 7D.

Click to expand...

Try the high iso series on a test subject with some dynamic range in it, your shadows will be horrible.

Click to expand...

I know it is not perfect, although I don't find the shadows to be too bad, I just wanted to help its lousy high ISO reputation a bit. Btw, for the shadows I have the correction tool (I think it's called brush in english)

I was looking at the tokina obviously produces beautiful shots in the right hands.

The f/4 is was my first L. Even though I have a 2.8 ii, I won't part with the 4. Just this weekend on a quick trip, I took the 2.8 out of my bag and carried the 4 instead to lighten the load. It is a great lens unless you actually need the 2.8.

just yesterday I had the opportunity to be at Bratislava city downhill
http://www.citydownhill.com/locations/3/bratislava-city-downhill-svk

I was allowed to shoot from the track with no problem, everyone thought I was just another hired photographer (here's the point where I give credit to my 70-200 ;D ). I was almost ran over once, but I had some nice view and was able to make some great shots

I love my 70–300L, but I'm finding myself frequently annoyed at the lack of reach after moving from crop to a 6D. I've considered moving to a 100–400L, but my 70–300L is already on the verge of being so long and heavy that I can't deal with it in the field. The 100–400L is two inches longer and a third again heavier. That's just beyond what I could ever consider carrying around with me.

I'm impressed that this proposed lens is only about .4" longer than the 70–300L. If that dimension turns out to be accurate, I might be able to deal with this lens. With that said, I'd much rather see a DO version of the 100–400L, so that I could get something approaching L quality images without having to deal with a lens that's so darn unmanageable.

Dylan777 said:

I would return it. +14 AFMA is little too much for my taste.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by your taste? If it gives correct results that's good, right?

well, fair enough I guess, some mod' completely deletes a new topic because it was similar to this one already in place. Too bad there's no mechanism in place to move the post or notify the OP to that effect.

so I'll repost some of it here.


If I were a pro sports 'tog I'd strongly consider the D4s simply for the better battery life and much deeper raw buffer depth.

www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-X-vs.-Nikon-D4s-sensor-review-Consummate-performers

as for it's incremental superiority in almost every other sensor metric, not likely enough difference to matter

tho this conclusion, burned into the URL as a particular comparison, is bound to annoy certain Canon fans

www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-X-vs.-Nikon-D4s-sensor-review-Consummate-performers/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Versus-Nikon-D4s-Nikon-has-the-advantage

Has anyone, and I mean a real dual system user who's spent enough time with each system to know it well rather than a 2 day rental kind of tester, evaluated the differences between these 2 cameras using comparable glass and have any real-world user observations or opinion to contribute?

Got the mint in box 3 year old 100L/IS for $750 with a $100 UV filter included. I'll let you all know how it goes!

alexturton said:

You do realise, that f/4 on FF is still thinner DoF than f/2.8 on APS-C, right?

Click to expand...

This is incorrect. A lens mounted on full frame or crop will deliver the same dof at the same aperture. Ie if you mount a 50 1.4 on a 70d or a 6d both will have the same dof. It's the same glass. But the angle of view will obviously be a lot wider on 6d

Click to expand...

NO!

I have often thought about a camera that can capture HDR in one shot. This is close to the idea, except that it has way too many lenses ;D

If you could split the light that comes through the lens with a prism or mirrors without a loss in quality and capture that image on 3 or more different sensors, where each sensor is calibrated to a different exposure, those image could be layered for a HDR image. There will be no ghosting because the images were captured at the same time.

The sensors could also be split that one captures highlights, the other shadows and a third colour... The possibilities would be endless

Pareto developed his principle(s) using whole-country data sets. Those are large data sets. Would-be users of the Pareto principle(s) are specifically cautioned not to use Pareto for small data sets. I'd hazard the guess that the OP is working with a small data set.

Thanks you , Sir and You are welcome, dear friend Mr. Quasimodo.
Have a great weekend.
Surapon