Europe Trip - Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Europe Trip - Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS?
Hello all,
I know that there have been many questions and threads regarding what lens to carry when travelling in Europe, but my question is more specific.
I want to carry a wide-angle lens since I will be carrying a crop sensor camera (Canon Xsi) and I will be shooting landscapes. I was browsing through lens rental websites and seems like the two most popular wide-angle zoom lenses available for canon are Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Any suggestions on which one is better and any major trade offs of one over the other? Also, please feel free to recommend any other lens (Sigma? Tamron?) that you might think will be better than the above two.
Thanks in advance.
I know that there have been many questions and threads regarding what lens to carry when travelling in Europe, but my question is more specific.
I want to carry a wide-angle lens since I will be carrying a crop sensor camera (Canon Xsi) and I will be shooting landscapes. I was browsing through lens rental websites and seems like the two most popular wide-angle zoom lenses available for canon are Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Any suggestions on which one is better and any major trade offs of one over the other? Also, please feel free to recommend any other lens (Sigma? Tamron?) that you might think will be better than the above two.
Thanks in advance.
#2
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what else are you taking, or are you looking at only 1 lens?
I have the Canon EF-S 15-85, snd its a wonderful lens. Wider than either of the ones you mention and a little longer. It is not as fast as the 2 you mention, which makes it great for outdoors, and a little more difficult for indoor situations. All-in-all, I find it makes a great walking-around lens, and works for about 90% of the situations I find myself in.
That 16-35 L probably has great image quality, and is a very nice, fast, wide angle lens. But it isn't long enough to be the only lens you carry. I'd feel very limited by only having 35mm at the long end.
I have the Canon EF-S 15-85, snd its a wonderful lens. Wider than either of the ones you mention and a little longer. It is not as fast as the 2 you mention, which makes it great for outdoors, and a little more difficult for indoor situations. All-in-all, I find it makes a great walking-around lens, and works for about 90% of the situations I find myself in.
That 16-35 L probably has great image quality, and is a very nice, fast, wide angle lens. But it isn't long enough to be the only lens you carry. I'd feel very limited by only having 35mm at the long end.
#3
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 7,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think OP is only taking one lens. At least I hope not!
The 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS are best for full frame sensor. If you have the crop sensor and want to shoot landscapes, go for something wider and be prepared to do some post-processing to get rid of the fish eye effect.
Of the two you have listed, go with the 16-35mm f/2.8L II. The glass is better. Because L.
The 16-35mm f/2.8L II or Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS are best for full frame sensor. If you have the crop sensor and want to shoot landscapes, go for something wider and be prepared to do some post-processing to get rid of the fish eye effect.
Of the two you have listed, go with the 16-35mm f/2.8L II. The glass is better. Because L.
#4
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the EF-S 10-22 for my crop sensor camera. I use it less since I got the 15-85. But the 10-22 is a very good wide angle lens for landscapes. Very little distortion, except at the widest zoom, and even then the effect is generally pleasing.
#6
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't need such a wide angle for landscapes imho. My widest lens is 17mm. It gives a good field of view - too wide and you are squashing the landscape into teh frame. Better to take three or four photos and stitch them together.
I actually find a longer lens extremely useful for landscapes, squashing the perspective on mountains and the like.
My advice, as a Pentax photographer who shoots mostly landscapes (and has sold a few too) would be to go for the 17-55, unless you are taking a longer lens too which covers the 55mm range, in which case go for the 16-35mm. If only taking one lens I suspect you will quickly become frustrated with anything wider, or shorter.
Wide angle photography requires practice to do it well, and a European trip is probably not the best place to try to learn.
I actually find a longer lens extremely useful for landscapes, squashing the perspective on mountains and the like.
My advice, as a Pentax photographer who shoots mostly landscapes (and has sold a few too) would be to go for the 17-55, unless you are taking a longer lens too which covers the 55mm range, in which case go for the 16-35mm. If only taking one lens I suspect you will quickly become frustrated with anything wider, or shorter.
Wide angle photography requires practice to do it well, and a European trip is probably not the best place to try to learn.
#9
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not being able to afford a 645D, yes it is a crop sensor.
A human sees a field of view roughly equivalent to a 50mm lens on a full frame, so about 35mm on a crop. So anything wider is a wide angle. Once you get down below 15mm it is ultra wide, and gets increasingly tricky to compose a good landscape. If your ultra wide is also a fish-eye, or distorts badly at the edges that just makes it even harder.
Since you will probably end up cropping such a photo why not use a longer lens and take a proper panorama with several photos stitched together. The end result will be vastly superior.
A human sees a field of view roughly equivalent to a 50mm lens on a full frame, so about 35mm on a crop. So anything wider is a wide angle. Once you get down below 15mm it is ultra wide, and gets increasingly tricky to compose a good landscape. If your ultra wide is also a fish-eye, or distorts badly at the edges that just makes it even harder.
Since you will probably end up cropping such a photo why not use a longer lens and take a proper panorama with several photos stitched together. The end result will be vastly superior.
#11
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lens attached to my 7D, most of the time, is the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM. It shows little distortion, little chromatic aberration, focuses under 9 inches and cost about half the Canon 17~55. It also has a longer warranty period.
Sure, it loses a stop at the longer end, but it gains 20mm. On the crop sensor, it's basically a 28~110mm, moderate wide angle to 2X zoom.
Sure, it loses a stop at the longer end, but it gains 20mm. On the crop sensor, it's basically a 28~110mm, moderate wide angle to 2X zoom.
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PandaZinc
Europe
14
Oct 29th, 2017 07:52 AM