16-35 praise

[arpi]

I want to thank evolution for allowing me to experience the power of the 16-35

http://www.scientificlinux.com/pics/pole.jpg

to see more pics of this lens go here

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81674

[drisley]

Yes, it really is a great lens.
But then again, for the price it SHOULD be ;)

[raylks]

Nice place Batimore. The Canon L lens line-up is very promising and costly.
Have you tried 10-22mm too? Super-wide is lovely!

[Dante King]

Ditto that on the 16-35 ;) Tried the 10-22 was a tad to wide for my liking. Sold the 10-22 to a happy new owner.

[arpi]

Thanks for your comments

Have you tried 10-22mm too? Super-wide is lovely!

no for the reason bellow

Tried the 10-22 was a tad to wide for my liking.

I imagine so. My pictures of buildings even with the 16-35 come out distorted at the edges. At 10mm there must be LOTS of distortion. The 16mm allows me to shoot anything I want so far.

This is an example of the distortion I am talking about. Look at the right edge of the building. The closer to right edge or to the left edge, the worst it gets.

http://www.scientificlinux.com/pics/building2.jpg

[drisley]

Such is life with a wide angle lens.

[Sean-Mcr]

I don't mind admitting when i get something wrong and i really messed up when i sent back what i now realise to have been a really good 16-35/2.8L copy:(

User error and i've realised too late:(

Just glad i know it was me,as that can only mean i'm going to get another one:)