Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Canon 16-35 F/2.8 L ll USM

profile picture
matt1239
Posts: 68 - Karma: 14
Hey NS, just wanted to ask if anyone had any experience and could share their thoughts about the Canon 16-35 F/2.8 L ll USM. I'm seriously considering picking one up. Thanks!
Dec 29 2011 9:00PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
It's really mad for a full frame, 16-35 is a weird range on a crop imo
Dec 29 2011 9:15PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Pretty sure landis shoots with his tokina @16mm. But I totally agree, tried shooting @16 and it sucked compared to @11
Dec 29 2011 10:49PM
0 0
profile picture
S.C
Posts: 3068 - Karma: 2,281
I disagree, I shoot 16-35 on a crop, its close to a 24-60 on full frame, and thats almost 24-70, which some consider the perfect range
Dec 30 2011 1:19AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
Hmm i guess so, my 17-50 is my least used lens so far
Dec 30 2011 1:30AM
0 0
profile picture
C-O-L-E
Posts: 138 - Karma: 22
Out of curiosity what is your most used?
Dec 30 2011 1:37AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
Well I've really only shot 3 days of skiing with my camera but overall mostly my 11-16 my 50 and my 18-200 but usually longer than 50. Anything thats within the 17-50 range i almost like moving around with my 50 better because its only a difference of like 10-50ft at the most. Then for wide stuff i used my 11-16 but i have used my 17-50 for 24/35 stuff too. So its not like i dont use it, but its my least used for sure.
Dec 30 2011 2:35AM
0 0
profile picture
C-O-L-E
Posts: 138 - Karma: 22
Yea i see, so is the tam sharper then your 18-200? isnt that 18-200 better then most others?
Dec 30 2011 2:57AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
id say the difference isnt noticeable but the tam is way faster. the sony 18-200 is a very good lens for what it is. i tend to use my zeiss 50 over the 17-50 but i like a fast 17-50tracks in my bag
Dec 30 2011 3:32AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
ignore tracks that what my phone
Dec 30 2011 3:32AM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
i know the sony your using is one of the good variable aperture lenses, how would it be if i got an adapter and put it on a crop canon DSLR
Dec 30 2011 10:25AM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
shit. sorry, didnt know it was in the price range of the canon 70-200 f4
Dec 30 2011 10:27AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61110 - Karma: 118,329
haha yes and the flange distance for emount lenses is very short, if the adapter even existed, which i doubt, it would need some weird mirrors and shit. Plus, half the reason its so good is the image stabilization and the AF.
Dec 30 2011 1:02PM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
ahh okay. makes sense
Dec 30 2011 1:04PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)