Hard Lense Decision

[twinrivers19]

Settle down everybody, no need to argue lol. I appreciate the input from everyone, and I have decided to get the 16-35. It is more practical, and there is too little difference to
pay that much more for a prime landscape lense.

 

[Gavjenks]

Oh also if you didn't notice it on the previous page and if you haven't hit buy yet, you should glance briefly at the Sigma 12-24 -- goes wider than either option you were considering, slots into your current lens collection at the 24mm end, costs half as much as the 16-35.

It is a bit slower, but that shouldn't matter much for landscapes, unless you also want to do astrophotography or something.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I'll pay extra when second best won't suffice. If you're worried about cost go with the least expensive. If you're worried about build quality, picture quality, better performance, less distortion in the corners and such.... do not settle for a second best product because its X times less expensive.

 

[Gavjenks]

do not settle for a second best product

Sometimes Canon glass, even L glass, IS the second best product. In addition to costing more. I have not used these particular lenses in question to comment on this case, but it is definitely true in some other parts of the lineup, and you cannot simply assume that a higher price tag = more quality.

If you do assume that absolutely, then I have a 200mm lens I would like to sell you. it's made out of plumbing pipe and surplus military glass, but I'm charging $5,000 for it, so it's guaranteed to be better than anything from Canon pretty much, right?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

do not settle for a second best product

Sometimes Canon glass, even L glass, IS the second best product. In addition to costing more. I have not used these particular lenses in question to comment on this case, but it is definitely true in some other parts of the lineup, and you cannot simply assume that a higher price tag = more quality.

If you do assume that absolutely, then I have a 200mm lens I would like to sell you. it's made out of plumbing pipe and surplus military glass, but I'm charging $5,000 for it, so it's guaranteed to be better than anything from Canon pretty much, right?

Never assumed such about canon nor said highest price is always best quality. just throwing some broad junk out there. I opted for my 50mm to be sigma, I like the pretty bokah. For me and my purposes its a better lens than Nikon and was a couple of bux cheaper

thats debatable too, just sayn'

 

[twinrivers19]

I considered the 12-24 Gav, but, I am big into astrophotography and really wanted a Canon L lense. The price wasn't much of a factor to me, I just
wanted something that fit my standards and I won't want to replace or think "maybe I should have...." in the next few years.