Thinking of getting rid of my 16-35, but...

A few weeks ago I picked up a Zeiss 21 and it has completely taken the place of my 16-35. For the majority of the time I was using my 16 for tripod supported landscapes and now my Zeiss takes that role 99% of the time. I am nervous just getting rid of it since I will basically be stuck with just my 70-200 for anything else requiring AF.

I looked at maybe trading down for a 17-40 that way I can have just about the same range and use it when I need AF, but am not sold.

Any suggestions on a cheaper direction to go then just having $1300 sitting in my bag waiting to be used..

I was thinking about grabbing a 35L (or maybe trading) since the 1.4 would be pretty useful but I'm not sold on the focal length.

No real point just looking to talk this out.

Thanks

trade it for 35L. I use 35L + 5dii combo 80% of the time and results are fantastic. I have other prime lens as well but find 35L the perfect everyday focal length for the full frame.

Have you thought about the 24-70 f2.8, or the 24-105 f4 IS?

I loved my 16-35mm, it was fantastic. But I realized that the difference between 16mm and 24mm, for me at least was about one step backward. I never really needed to be that wide, especially with my baby 24-70mm F/2.8. The 24-70 is just magical, mine is 5 years old and still pushing extremely strong. It has your wide to barely telephoto covered in one nice lens. I faced the same dilemma with my 70-200mm F/2.8 IS once I realized I hadn't used it in 6 months and brought it to africa just to not use it. I sold it got some stuff I knew I really wanted and never looked back.

I love the 35mm focal length on a full frame sensor. I get a bit more background, making the lens an "environmental" lens. 35mm doesn't show distortion like you'd get with 24mm and so it makes for a decent panoramic lens.

To me, if you don't shoot 16-35 wide open and/or if you do a lot of wide angle work stopped down, I think the 17-40 is good enough. Like you did, I'd go for a dedicated prime for landscape work and the Zeiss 21 is on my list.

If I ever get the 16-35, it'll be because I bought 24-70 mk II and just need the 16-35 mk II to complete my f/2.8 zoom collection...

Thanks for the suggestions. I have tried the 24-70 and 24-105 and while I liked them, I don't really find that intermediate range too useful for me.

I think I will play around with my 16-35 at 35 for awhile and see how I like the range. I'm trying to figure out what the cash situation would be if I could find someone to trade me a 35L

Anyone have any idea what the appropriate trade situation would be for a 35L? Im thinking it would be the 35 plus some cash but I'm not sure how much. Any views?

tats wrote in post #13993762
Anyone have any idea what the appropriate trade situation would be for a 35L? Im thinking it would be the 35 plus some cash but I'm not sure how much. Any views?

16-35 II would sell for around $1200 for an excellent copy; a 35L for around $1100. New prices are around $200 difference.

I recommend looking at www.keh.com for pricing ideas because they rate their glass by condition. Also look at your local Craigslist, fredmiranda, and this board's marketplace.

The maximum used price to me would be Canon USA's refurb prices after factoring in shipping and local sales tax. The Canon price includes a 3 month factory warranty.

I was considering getting a 16-35 but couldn't justify the cost for a focal range that I don't use that much. I ended up with an older 17-35 2.8 that I love to pieces. Cost me $600.

I just went with a manual focus 14mm f2.8, and then have 24-200mm covered. Seem to be good enough for my needs.

I think I'm going to try and either trade it for a 35L or just sell it and then buy one.

Thanks guys

You can get a 17-40 for pretty cheap. It'll work well if you plan on using it stopped down for landscapes.

Staszek wrote in post #13999402
You can get a 17-40 for pretty cheap. It'll work well if you plan on using it stopped down for landscapes.

I now use my Zeiss almost exclusively for landscape shots, but I was considering trading down.

tats wrote in post #13999419
I now use my Zeiss almost exclusively for landscape shots, but I was considering trading down.

Maybe look into a 17mm tilt-shift or the 8-15 fisheye if either of those offer characteristics you may desire.

the 16-35 was underwhelming. stick with zeiss for wides and canon for teles.