B BLahey Well-known member Jun 10, 2013 #1 As stated above, was wondering how it compares to the 16-35 I or II on the C100 or BMC (if ya got a BMC!)
As stated above, was wondering how it compares to the 16-35 I or II on the C100 or BMC (if ya got a BMC!)
anatusa Veteran Jun 11, 2013 #2 i use even older one - 20-35 f2.8 - really good lens, less plastic parts, based on some reviews from net - has less aberration compared to 16-35. but does has softer corners , what does not really meter on 1.5 crop sensor
i use even older one - 20-35 f2.8 - really good lens, less plastic parts, based on some reviews from net - has less aberration compared to 16-35. but does has softer corners , what does not really meter on 1.5 crop sensor
D deanoise Member Jun 13, 2013 #3 The 17 to 55 2.8 is, I think, a much more useful range. I love that lens, it's my "default" lens.
anatusa Veteran Jun 14, 2013 #4 i had black corners on my c300 with efs 17-55, - so i kind of did not like it, focus ring also kind of sucks, but image its self was good, IS nice
i had black corners on my c300 with efs 17-55, - so i kind of did not like it, focus ring also kind of sucks, but image its self was good, IS nice
