Thinking of getting one of the older 20-35L or 17-35L

[iaind]

I have the 17-35 and it gives good results. Bear in mind that it is not CPS supported.

 

[Drizzt321]

I got a used 17-40L. Haven't used it much yet, as I was too busy with other things this weekend, but I'll try and find some time to take it out and try some different things with it.

 

[KreutzerPhotography]

Cant argue with the 17-40 as long as f/4 is acceptable... Shooting weddings I NEED the 2.8 (about the slowest that would be acceptable). I have heard too much good about the 17-40 to hate on it too much...

Seems to be a war between 16-35 and 17-40 and neither CAN win because the two lenses are for different purposes

 

[Marsu42]

Shooting weddings I NEED the 2.8 (about the slowest that would be acceptable)

Could you please elaborate that? If f2.8 is the min. wedding aperture without IS for a 24-70 lens, isn't f4 ok for a 16mm focal length - esp. if it is for fewer, select shots only? Or is it because the af is better at f2.8?

 

[Drizzt321]

Shooting weddings I NEED the 2.8 (about the slowest that would be acceptable)

Could you please elaborate that? If f2.8 is the min. wedding aperture without IS for a 24-70 lens, isn't f4 ok for a 16mm focal length - esp. if it is for fewer, select shots only? Or is it because the af is better at f2.8?

It's to get the shutter speed up as high as possible. Most especially if you're in an area that doesn't allow flashes, although not sure how often you'd use a super-wide or wide angle in those areas, which are usually churches, since you'd be getting kinda in the way for most ceremonies. And getting the shutter speed up is less about hand held motion than it is about freezing the subjects motion.

 

[Marsu42]

It's to get the shutter speed up as high as possible. Most especially if you're in an area that doesn't allow flashes, although not sure how often you'd use a super-wide or wide angle in those areas, which are usually churches, since you'd be getting kinda in the way for most ceremonies.

Exactly - you named one reason for my doubting f2.8 on a uwa is all important. The second is shutter speed - if 1/x second is ok @70mm and f2.8 for handheld & motion, then surely 1/(x/2) is ok @17mm and f4?

Of course "as fast as possible" is desirable, but I'm wondering if for a wedding/event setup a top f2.8 uwa zoom is the right spot to spend money for in contrast to your "bread and butter" 24-70 & maybe 70-200 f2.8 zooms.

 

[Drizzt321]

It's to get the shutter speed up as high as possible. Most especially if you're in an area that doesn't allow flashes, although not sure how often you'd use a super-wide or wide angle in those areas, which are usually churches, since you'd be getting kinda in the way for most ceremonies.

Exactly - you named one reason for my doubting f2.8 on a uwa is all important. The second is shutter speed - if 1/x second is ok @70mm and f2.8 for handheld & motion, then surely 1/(x/2) is ok @17mm and f4?

Of course "as fast as possible" is desirable, but I'm wondering if for a wedding/event setup a top f2.8 uwa zoom is the right spot to spend money for in contrast to your "bread and butter" 24-70 & maybe 70-200 f2.8 zooms.

Sure, if the subjects are staying pretty still. If there's a good bit of action, you still need a high shutter speed. So at 17mm, 1/20 might be a decent shutter speed for say the alter. But when you add in the priest, couple getting married, grooms-men, brides-maids, even normal movement at 1/20 might be blurred, so 1/60 is much better, and 1/120 is significantly better.