C100: Canon 16-35mm vs 17-55mm IS

M

maddchase

Member
I got the C100 with the 24-105mm kit lens and loving it so far, but looking into options for a wider range, need advice on the decision between the 16-35mm L series or opt for the 17-55mm which has image stabilization but not weather proofed like the L series lens. Am looking at these two lenses specifically. Thanks in advance.
 
Have you thought about the tokina 11-16mm? You'd probably want wider than 16mm and I personally never seem to care about missing the 17-23mm range on a crop camera...
 
I have thought about the Tokina but I'm not sure how often I would use that lens just because of how wide it is. But I have a friend who is getting the 11-16mm and I'll get to play with it in a couple weeks but I think I may take the advice and get the 17-55mm for the IS, it'll be used for more doc and events type shoots.
 
I have the Canon 17-55 IS (sold the 24-105), it works best for my needs (simple doc work for local area businesses). Sharp and Wide!
 
The 16-35 is a great lens and build much better than the 17-55. The optical quality is great on both though, so if you need IS (I do a lot) the choice is obvious. Also the longer end of the EF-S most of the time is enough for me indoors to get a closer shot. Not nearly as long as the 25-105 of course, but I guess I`d be changing lenses much more often, when using the 16-35 for the wide end...
 
Really dig the 17-55mm IS. Much sharper than the FF L lenses and smaller. Build quality not so good, though. Collects dust and my aperture assembly died after 14 months... VERY expensive repair.

Most respectable camera ops I know won't use IS for video, so that might be a moot point if you take your work seriously. I use it, but agree it can get wonky.

Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 looks amazing but who knows. Cheap, too. Probably going to have to pick one up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top