User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  2
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: EF 16-35 f/2.8L V EF 17-40 f/4.0L

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Feb 2010
    Location
    Tumut
    Posts
    1,379
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    EF 16-35 f/2.8L V EF 17-40 f/4.0L

    Came across this link that might be helpful to anyone tossing up between the Canon 16-35 & 17-40 lenses http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...on-17-40.shtml.

    I was tossing up before I bought my 17-40 and in the end it was mostly landscape value I was looking for where there was a likelihood of longer exposures over a tripod. Value for money and moderate use of a smaller f/stop toward the wider end helped sway my decision.

    Hope others find this useful

    Roy

    5D MkIII gripped; EF 17-40 f/4L; EF 24-105 f/4L; EF 50 f/1.8; EF 135 f/2L; 580EXII; Manfrotto 055XPROB & 308RC ballhead; Computrekker Plus AW
    My Photobucket / My flickr

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    14 Nov 2009
    Location
    Roleystone
    Posts
    1,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wonderbar! I have been researching these two lenses myself & decided I would go with the 17-40mm L as you have, more bang for your buck
    Imagine a world without photography... one could only imagine. - Berenice Abbott

    I Shoot Canon


  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Jul 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    923
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Please note that the 16-36L is the MkI version, not the MkII.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •