Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
On the 16-35 - I've got 3 lenses that cover 24mm and the 16-35 is the preferred option, it's sharper than my 24 TS-E and the colour rendition is superb. At 24mm I'd prefer it over the 24-74 as well. I've not tried a 17-40 so it may be sharper, but I've no complaints on the 16-35.
Apart from the way they snap when they fall off a tripod...
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
I nearly sold my Stigma 12-24 also at one point (when I first got my 16-35, glad I didn't), it still adds a whole new dimension to any images. Go for it Jasper66, you're going to have a sh*tload of problems with the Stigma, but hey, they might just be worth it !
As Andy says the 17-40 will do - it does for me on my 5D.
The 16-35 will give an extra stop but for landscapes only you don't really need it, so the extra expense is probably unjustified.
As for the Stigma, well, why spoil the ship?
Quote: As Andy says the 17-40 will do - it does for me on my 5D.
Ditto - I've been using this combination for about 9 months and am very pleased with it.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar