Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Jan 2014 (Thursday) 01:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70Lf4 or 16-35L 2.8 ii for interiors

 
BcuzofHisLuv
Member
Avatar
90 posts
Joined Jan 2014
Location: Sunny SOCAL
     
Jan 23, 2014 01:55 |  #1

Hello everyone,

I am new to POTN and I need you advice/input on these two glasses. I will be shooting architectural/real estate interiors and exteriors. For interiors, I will be shooting at f8 or f11 to try to balance the ambient. Which of the two do you recommend?


Just my camera and I :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
l_e_x_y_
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2012
Location: netherlands, suameer
     
Jan 23, 2014 03:11 |  #2

For interiors and architecture: Go wide! And you already have the 24-105 so the 24-70 f4 feels like a replacement for that. You won't gain al lot at f8 or f11 probably.

The 16 35 mm feels like a whole new area and compliments your current line up perfectly.
You could try out the 17-40. Or try the samyang 14 f2.8. I love this lens. For the type of work you do it is really nice. And the distortion is 100% correctable in LR or any other tool. And you don't need AF for the type of work you do.
The beast at the high end of the market would be the 17 TSE. But you know this :)

So give your option: 16-35 or 24-70?
100% 16-35


www.movere-media.nl (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,093 posts
Gallery: 1549 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 9978
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 23, 2014 06:56 |  #3

Heya,

You already have 24mm for width.

Go 16-35. That 16~18mm range gives you the extra width for tight rooms.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bonbridge
Goldmember
Avatar
1,263 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 415
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Netherlands
     
Jan 23, 2014 07:35 |  #4

I would buy the 17-40L instead. At > f/8.0 there is no reason to buy the 16-35LII. Run away with the 17-40L and keep 600 dollar in your pocket.
I wouldn't buy the Samyang 14. It is a great lens, but it has much distortion which is really anoying with architecture.


5DII + 6D | 16-35/4.0L IS | Σ35/1.4A | 40/2.8 | Σ85/1.4A | 85/1.2L II | 70-200/2.8L IS II
iMac Retina 5k | i7 | 24Gb RAM | 512GB Flash | 4GB M295X

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,093 posts
Gallery: 1549 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 9978
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Jan 23, 2014 07:51 |  #5

Bonbridge wrote in post #16629312 (external link)
I would buy the 17-40L instead. At > f/8.0 there is no reason to buy the 16-35LII. Run away with the 17-40L and keep 600 dollar in your pocket.
I wouldn't buy the Samyang 14. It is a great lens, but it has much distortion which is really anoying with architecture.

This is a good point. The 17-40 is definitely a better overall package for his use. And cheaper. Definitely don't need the aperture for architecture/commercia​l.

That said, one could probably get away without even getting `L glass for this. It's being stopped down, and even budget zooms and mid-tier zooms stopped down are about as sharp. If budget matters at all.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
l_e_x_y_
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2012
Location: netherlands, suameer
     
Jan 23, 2014 08:47 |  #6

Bonbridge wrote in post #16629312 (external link)
I would buy the 17-40L instead. At > f/8.0 there is no reason to buy the 16-35LII. Run away with the 17-40L and keep 600 dollar in your pocket.
I wouldn't buy the Samyang 14. It is a great lens, but it has much distortion which is really anoying with architecture.

I agree, the samyang has a fair bit of distortion... but it really is correctable. Try this for example: http://joopsnijder.blo​gspot.nl …ofile-for-samyang-14.html (external link)

Price/quality is unmatched. I dislike that it doesn't have a filter thread.

Tight budget and really wide: 14 samyang
Bigger budget: 17-40 canon
Money no problem: 16-35 canon or 17 tilt shift canon


www.movere-media.nl (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bonbridge
Goldmember
Avatar
1,263 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 415
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Netherlands
     
Jan 23, 2014 09:15 |  #7

I totally forgot the Tokina 16-28! It's IQ is better than the 16-35LII and 17-40L. It has the same price as the 17-40L but has 2.8 and is 16mm. If you don't have to use filters it is probably the best buy.

If you want to use filters I would buy the 17-40L.

If you want speed and use filters the 16-35L is the only option.

For architecture my votes goes to:
When you don't need filters: 16-28 > 17-40L > 16-35L > 14
When you want to use filters: 17-40L > 16-35L > 16-28 > 14

For normal daylight landscapes my votes goes to:
When you don't need filters: 16-28 > 14 > 17-40L > 16-35L
When you want to use filters: 17-40L > 16-35L > 16-28 > 14

For nightscapes my votes goes to:
When you don't need filters: 14 > 16-28 > 16-35L > 17-40L
When you want to use filters: 16-35L > 17-40L > 14 > 16-28

For walkaround my votes goes to:
When you don't need filters: 16-28 > 17-40L > 16-35L > 14
When you want to use filters: 17-40L > 16-35L > 16-28 > 14


5DII + 6D | 16-35/4.0L IS | Σ35/1.4A | 40/2.8 | Σ85/1.4A | 85/1.2L II | 70-200/2.8L IS II
iMac Retina 5k | i7 | 24Gb RAM | 512GB Flash | 4GB M295X

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Jan 23, 2014 09:21 |  #8

Why not a 24mm TS-E II ? The shift abilities allow very wide shots and the distorsion is very low.

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
l_e_x_y_
Member
Avatar
55 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2012
Location: netherlands, suameer
     
Jan 23, 2014 09:42 |  #9

Bonbridge wrote in post #16629549 (external link)
I totally forgot the Tokina 16-28! It's IQ is better than the 16-35LII and 17-40L. It has the same price as the 17-40L but has 2.8 and is 16mm. If you don't have to use filters it is probably the best buy.
...

Damn yeah, I always seem to forget this jewel!


www.movere-media.nl (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,537 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 325
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Jan 23, 2014 09:56 |  #10

I'll buck the current here... For interior shots, I'd stay away from the Ultra-wides.

It is correct that you can easily correct for barrel/pincushion distortion in post. Even for some tilt (you will find that your lens axis better be exactly perpendicular to the verticals and select horizontals, otherwise you get converging lines that ought to be parallel). Here is an extreme case:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i37.photobucket​.com …_zps809a0d01.jp​g~original (external link)


There is a distortion (I don't know if there is another term) I'll call perspective distortion which no program can cure. It arises from the fact that the UWA covers... extreme angles. Say you are shooting a room interior. The wall opposite to you is say, 20 ft away. At your right, there is a chair at 3 ft. The Samyang on a tripod with the lens axis perfectly horizontal and perpendicular to the far wall will record a photo which is sharp all over, the walls are perfectly vertical and parallel, ...and the chair looks like a sofa!

You can't fix this in post. It is the projection of a 3D arrangement of objects to a 2D focal plane.

Here is a crude (handheld test of my Sigma 8-16, probably the third photo I shot with the lens)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


To the right it is an armchair, not a loveseat.

What I am trying to say, is don't fall in love with the short focal length. Make sure you buy the right tool for the job.

I've heard people having good results by stitching panoramas, rather than resorting to UUWA for interiors.

Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,025 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3216
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Jan 23, 2014 10:02 |  #11

MakisM1 wrote in post #16629650 (external link)
I've heard people having good results by stitching panoramas, rather than resorting to UUWA for interiors.

Thats a good point. I've not thought of that.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - Laowa 9mm - 18-55 - 23/35/50/90 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kronie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,183 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jan 23, 2014 10:11 |  #12

If dollars allow the tilt shift is the way to go for interior work. This is the one you want:

http://www.amazon.com …tal-Cameras/dp/B001TDL2OA (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BcuzofHisLuv
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
90 posts
Joined Jan 2014
Location: Sunny SOCAL
     
Jan 23, 2014 10:26 |  #13

I posted this last night after class and didn't realize until this morning that I had made a huge typo LOL. I meant to ask between the 17-40L f4 and 16-35L f2.8. I am new on here and I don't know how to change the topic or if that's even possible. My apologies to everyone!


Just my camera and I :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1051
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Jan 23, 2014 10:39 |  #14
bannedPermanent ban

If that's the case, go with the 17-40.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
3,059 posts
Likes: 181
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Jan 23, 2014 11:02 |  #15

BCuz.
I was in the same situation up until last Friday afternoon.
Since a 5D Mark III arrived at Christmas, the Wide Angle Zoom was lacking for my Full Frame body. I have the Canon 10-22 which is great on my 7D's. The question for me came down as did yours. The 16-36 f/2.8 L or the 17-40 f/4 L? I will be shooting landscape, interiors, exterior Architecture etc. similar to you. I did not have f/2.8 before, so I would not miss it. Adding 2.8 was a consideration, maybe.
Last Friday, I went to my local family owned Camera Store and we were able to shoot with both lenses on my 5D III. We compared images side by side.
The situations stated above did not require the additional stop as f/4 is no slouch. 1 mil difference may make a difference, when who knows. What I do know is the the 16-35 is not double the performance. The 17-40 is not half as good as the the 16-35. I think you know where I am going, the 17-40 is half the Cost of the 16-35. That really is a huge chunk in savings to maybe add to apply towards a new 24-70.
So you probably guessed it.........I bought the 17-40 f/4 L.
What I do know is that while this is a tough choice, there is no wrong choice.
I hope this helps.


Canon 5D Mark III (x2), BG-E11 Grips, 7D (x2) BG-E7 Grips, Canon Lenses 16-35 f/4 L IS, 17-40 f/4 L, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 24-105 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS, TS-E 24 f/3.5 L II, 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS, 10-22 f3.5-4.5, 17-55 f/2.8 L IS, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, Canon 1.4 Extender III, 5 Canon 600 EX-RT, 2 Canon ST-E3 Transmitters, Canon Pixma PRO-10 Printer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,453 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70Lf4 or 16-35L 2.8 ii for interiors
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is somphotobooth
899 guests, 231 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.