Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

[eml58]

[/quote]

Whoohoo!!

I had to double take on the first one with two chicks kissing....

:
[/quote]

Hilarious, I'm hopeless, didn't notice that until I read your Post, no wonder I'm a mediocre Photographer, cant see the wood for the Trees, or what ever.

 

[romanr74]

use it a lot when travelling cities and love it...

 

[CarlTN]

The Tokina 16-28 is a far better buy than the Canon 16-35. I just used one for the first time, today. It's sharper, and costs just over half. The only thing it can't do is use filters...but how many of the above shots were done with filters? In these days of HDR, how necessary is it to use sky grad filters for landscape? If you are rigidly traditional, that's one thing. I'm not. I'm also not as big of a fan of polarizer filters...although if you are shooting large expanses of water in mid day light (for some reason)...then they can come in handy.

I personally would like a 24mm T/S lens to go along with the wide zoom, but I won't be buying a T/S anytime soon. I guess a solution would be to rent when necessary.

 

[Marsu42]

The Tokina 16-28 is a far better buy than the Canon 16-35. I just used one for the first time, today. It's sharper, and costs just over half.

The Achilles' heel of the Tokina is flare control (or the lack of) - try shooting into the sun or point light sources at dusk/night and you'll get very "artistic" results - and with an uwa lens you're bound to have lights in the picture often.

The Canon's are much better, the 17-40 is said to be even best (probably due to the smaller lens diameter), I have never managed to get any flare at all. So for strictly indoor shots w/o effect or protection filter, the Tokina is excellent value, but imho that's about it.

 

[CarlTN]

Marsu, excellent point. However, I did shoot the Tokina outdoors and into the sun today. I saw no flare. If there ever is some, surely it is minimal.

 

[Hobby Shooter]

Any thoughts on how this lens is useful for anything other than landscapes?

it is good for being returned!

Please elaborate on this informed comment.

 

[Marsu42]

Marsu, excellent point. However, I did shoot the Tokina outdoors and into the sun today. I saw no flare. If there ever is some, surely it is minimal.

I didn't research it that much, but the sample shots I saw were mostly night-time like these, and you don't get this type of flare (circles around point lights) with the 17-40L (and afaik 16-35L): http://www.mattsepeta.com/tokina-16-28mm-f2-8-review

 

[CarlTN]

Interesting, I've not seen flare like that before. I'll see if I can get my friend to let me try the lens at night.

This is the wide zoom I was working toward purchasing for myself. I don't anticipate shooting many street light scenes with my night photography, though. I prefer to shoot the Milky Way...and the upcoming comet which is supposedly going to be gigantic and bright in the sky. If it is, of course there will be billions of photos shot of it...so mine probably won't matter much. I guess it would help if it didn't have some weird flare around it...but maybe it could be cloned out.

 

[eyeland]

the upcoming comet which is supposedly going to be gigantic and bright in the sky

Sorry to off-topic, but which comet are you referring to?
Been wanting to get into astro photographs for a while, and that sounds like a good reason for a trip to the darkness

 

[Northstar]

KKC,

I read your post and thought to myself, "isn't this the guy that wrote that he was thinking of selling his 5d3 and downgrading his whole system just a few months ago?"

So, I looked at your recent posts and sure enough, yes you did. Then I noticed that you did a 180 and went the other direction and spent quite a bit more money on a sig 35 1.4 and the 16-35...and the whole time you've been contemplating a 1DX?

My two cents...slow way down my friend....way down.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

KKC,

I read your post and thought to myself, "isn't this the guy that wrote that he was thinking of selling his 5d3 and downgrading his whole system just a few months ago?"

So, I looked at your recent posts and sure enough, yes you did. Then I noticed that you did a 180 and went the other direction and spent quite a bit more money on a sig 35 1.4 and the 16-35...and the whole time you've been contemplating a 1DX?

My two cents...slow way down my friend....way down.

I know but I have a short period of time here before my extra photo money will run out so I was trying to get some gear Before I am wanting a lens I can no longer afford. I love my sigma 35mm now that I mfa it the iq is awesome. I am just having a hard time creatively with the 16-35.

 

[Northstar]

KKC,

I read your post and thought to myself, "isn't this the guy that wrote that he was thinking of selling his 5d3 and downgrading his whole system just a few months ago?"

So, I looked at your recent posts and sure enough, yes you did. Then I noticed that you did a 180 and went the other direction and spent quite a bit more money on a sig 35 1.4 and the 16-35...and the whole time you've been contemplating a 1DX?

My two cents...slow way down my friend....way down.

I know but I have a short period of time here before my extra photo money will run out so I was trying to get some gear Before I am wanting a lens I can no longer afford. I love my sigma 35mm now that I mfa it the iq is awesome. I am just having a hard time creatively with the 16-35.

extra photo money?

is someone giving you money to spend on gear for a limited amount of time? ;D :

 

[risc32]

maybe it's like that movie "brewster's millions". that's a good one.
i agree, you should slow down.

also, that tokina can't take filters, and has a screwy manual focus system, but if that stuff doesn't bother you... i'd rather have the 17-40, but that's just me. if you can't see the value in the 16-35 over something like the 17-40 or tokina you shouldn't buy it.

 

[insanitybeard]

and 2 more...again, totally different scene...

in the first one I was definitely embracing the distortion, the girl I was shooting was very thin and not overly tall, but taller than average. This is where distortion can be your friend...but even with that in mind...it's not for everyone.

Chuck, I love the look and perspective of that second shot! Her legs go on for miles..... 8)

 

[Axilrod]

No offense, but the pictures you took are very boring and don't seem like you put much effort into experimenting with positioning/composition. With UWA's you have to get close to the subjects, or at least close to some part of the image. It's a great lens if you like to shoot ultra-wide, but you have to learn to shoot ultra wide first. 16mm just may not be for you.

I say keep your 24-70, sell your 16-35mm and pick up the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 for $399 and that way you have a UWA if you end up needing it in the future and it's much less costly.

 

[CarlTN]

the upcoming comet which is supposedly going to be gigantic and bright in the sky

Sorry to off-topic, but which comet are you referring to?
Been wanting to get into astro photographs for a while, and that sounds like a good reason for a trip to the darkness

The name escapes me at the moment and I'm in a hurry...late as usual. Try googling "fall 2013 comet".

 

[gary]

I am surprised that you find the 16-35 uninspired. I have similar lenses to you and each of them serve a different and sometimes overlapping function. I have only recently acquired the 16-35 but had a clear idea what I was looking for it to be. For me spending a large amount of money on a lens is everything to do with need and knowing in advance what I want to use it for and of course getting lots of advice, but I would never buy a lens with a single purpose in mind unless I am looking to a prime. The 16-35 provides the opportunity to be creative, perhaps more creative than with the other lenses in the bag. I have bought mine primarily for landscapes/seascapes but also intend to use it for portrait and architecture. Experiment with it and I am sure you will be surprised at its flexibility. Good luck, don't give up.

 

[unfocused]

I LOVE using UWA's!

The images here are from the 17-40. I chose these in particular since they are all shot as wide as possible. I also use my UWA ~2x a week working indoors for a company here in Tulsa. I would, however, really consider your style. My wife rarely ever shoots with my 17-40 on her 60D, she prefers the 35L, that is her style and that is what she uses to get results. The 17-40 was the first L lens we bought and I have grown to love it despite it's flaws. Next year I plan on upgrading to the 16-35, but if you are a fan of the UWA look, I would consider the 16-35, 17-40, or Tamron 17-50 2.8. I have used all three and have few complaints with any of them.

Again, if wide is your style, have some fun, but if not, save your money to later optimize your shooting style.

-Tabor

Tabor, I love these shots. Very few portrait photographers have the courage to use an UWA. Even fewer have the talent to know how to use it. You have both.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

and 2 more...again, totally different scene...

in the first one I was definitely embracing the distortion, the girl I was shooting was very thin and not overly tall, but taller than average. This is where distortion can be your friend...but even with that in mind...it's not for everyone.

Chuck, I love the look and perspective of that second shot! Her legs go on for miles..... 8)

TY...I hope its the shot you like and not the girl...lol... that was from a fashion show

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

I LOVE using UWA's!

The images here are from the 17-40. I chose these in particular since they are all shot as wide as possible. I also use my UWA ~2x a week working indoors for a company here in Tulsa. I would, however, really consider your style. My wife rarely ever shoots with my 17-40 on her 60D, she prefers the 35L, that is her style and that is what she uses to get results. The 17-40 was the first L lens we bought and I have grown to love it despite it's flaws. Next year I plan on upgrading to the 16-35, but if you are a fan of the UWA look, I would consider the 16-35, 17-40, or Tamron 17-50 2.8. I have used all three and have few complaints with any of them.

Again, if wide is your style, have some fun, but if not, save your money to later optimize your shooting style.

-Tabor

Nice shots! UWA's aren't easy, but when you nail it, you get results like this...very nice!