Canon L Glass

When you say the camera out-resolves the lens, what do you mean exactly?
 
I'm looking for some wide angle L glass from Canon. I had always figured I would get the 16-35 once I had the money, but I didn't realize how much less expensive the 17-40 is. I shoot almost exclusively landscapes, and have a tripod with me at all times... so I was thinking that the f/4 on the 17 compared with f/2.8 on the 16 wouldn't hinder me too much. Then I'd spend the difference on getting the 100mm macro lens which I've been scheming on as well.

So my main question is, is the only difference between the 16-35 f/2.8 and the 17-40 f/4 the max aperture? There is no large difference in glass quality that I'm missing out on if I go with the 17?

Thanks for your thoughts....

Erik

You should save money for a full frame Canon camera before debating whether to buy a 17-40 f4 or the 16-35 f2.8. Should you choose to keep your crop frame camera you should consider the EF-S 10-22mm lens. At 10mm x 1.6 is close to a 16mm on a full frame camera.

I have a 5D2 and the 17-40 f4. I am happy with it. I don't mind the F4 vs F2.8 as much as the 17mm vs. 16mm. 1mm makes a significant difference in the wide angle world. The 16-35mm costs more than twice the 17-40mm though.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top