Ultra Wide Angle Lens: f/4: 16-35 or 17/40?

P

payal_choksi

Well-known member
Hi all,

i am considering to buy an UWA lens for shooting wide videos. Bit confused between the 17-40 and new 16-35 f/4. The difference of 1mm is not much for me on the wide side but the price is. The 16-35 f4 is expensive compared to 17-40 but both of them are f4 and only 1 mm apart.

so would be wise to save the difference in money and go for 17-40 which will be used on my 5d mark III or should i go for 16-35?

i have read that the new 16-35 is sharper than 17-40 (which is an old lens), but is the difference between the two perceived in the video?
 
I don't have the 17-40, but I can tell you that the 16-35L has less distortion at the wide end which can be a real problem in video. Also, the IS on the 16-35 is absolutely fantastic. Silent and designed for video.
 
at last someone bothered to reply to my thread. thanks for the reply. do you mean to say that because the 16-35 has less distortion at the wide end, it is a real problem in video or the 17-40 has more distortion so it's an problem? kindly clear my confusion.
 
It seems that there are two threads going on right now on the same topic. I try to clear up the confusion on the other thread. Or, maybe add to it. Concerning this thread and the distortion of the 16-35 vs 17-40, I was wrong in my initial statement that the 17-40 has more distortion than the 16-35. They have comparable distortion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top