Low light conditions

[fatclay]

Will an F4 lense on a tripod with a larger AV setting capture as good an image as a F2.8 lense, or is there no comparison.

I am looking at buying the 17-40 F4 L as so many of you have rated this lense quite highly. But I have also noticed many comments about going for a F2.8 in lowlight conditions rather than a F4.

Would I not be better of saving and getting the 16-35 F2.8L.

It is for outdoors and sunsets, not alot off indoor stuff.

Thanks

[Screamer]

If it is for outdoor landscapes and stationary objects (in low light), the f4 should serve you fine provided you use a tripod like you mention. :)

[Sam]

If it is for outdoor landscapes and stationary objects (in low light), the f4 should serve you fine provided you use a tripod like you mention. :)

I agree, if you have no need for low light performance you will be very happy with the 17-40. You would have enough left over to pick up some primes too, in case you decided you needed something faster.

[joeseph]

There's only three reasons I can think of for using a f/2.8 over a f4
1) Narrower depth of field
2) More light for a given shutterspeed - easier to handhold and keep from camerashake
3) From what I gather, most lenses are sharpest a few stops from wide open, so a "sharper" f stop would be at a slightly higher speed, again useful to prevent shake.

With Landscape photography, you'll not be needing 1)
With a tripod, 2) & 3) shouldn't be an issue.


go for the 17-40!

[Jon]

If you're not shooting moving subjects, the 17-40 on a tripod will be every bit as good as the 16-35 on a tripod for low light pictures.