Hi guys, I'm new on this forum and the question in the title is bothering me.
I am a keen amateur photographer, but due to work commitments don't get out with the camera as much as id like to. I am on my 3rd DSLR, started with a 450D, then got a 7D 18 months ago, and now have just taken my first steps into full frame with the 5D Mark III.
I am currently using the kit 24-105 L which I love, its also what I used with the 7D. However I want something wider since landscape photography is my favourite kind.
So I am at a crossroads.... For someone who isn't professional at all, is the 16-35 F4 really worth the extra £300 on the used market over the 17-40? Reviews are mixed for the 17-40 but most bring up an issue with corner sharpness and extreme barrel distortion at the wide end and wide open... I am sure these are picked up on reviews because its an extreme test thats looking for those issues? I would assume that in general use, if these issues are obvious, they can be corrected in lightroom with the lens profile?
Or... is the 16-35 F4 really that much better?
I can afford either of them, but is the 16-35 F4 worth nearly double the cost?