Which UWA?

I currently have a 10 - 22 for my 650D, and I'm borrowing a 17 - 40L to play with on my 6D. I can't see a huge difference minus the constant aperture on the 17 - 40L. So, do I take the plunge and buy the 17 - 40 to stick on my 6D and leave my 24 - 105 on my 650D? Or do I go one better and get the 16 - 35?

What are peoples opinions, is the price difference worth it that much? Or should I just stick with what I have? I'm more tempted by the 16 or 17 purely because the 6D performs much better all round than my 650D.

So, what do you reckon?

It depends on what and how you shoot. Chances are if you haven't needed f/2.8 on your 10-22, then you probably will not need it on your 6D.

If you like and often shoot ultra-wide and/or if you shoot that wide inside a lot (events and stuff with people and movement), then you will probably want the 16-35L. (Assuming you have the cash.)

If you only sometimes shoot ultra-wide you and/or are outside stopped down shooting landscapes, then the 17-40L will probably do it for you. (Much less cash needed.)

These are just generalizations.

Did you compare the edge sharpness between the two, some don't like the edge sharpness on the L lenses compared to the 10-22?

Unless you need f2.8 the 16-35 doesn't offer more than the 17-40 other than a lighter wallet, especially when stopped down.

There's also the Tokina 16-28 f2.8(reasonably priced, sharp, but more prone to flare-limited to square filter systems) as well as several UWA prime options.

i'd leave the body cap on the 650D, and only bust it out, if you need a backup

Hey, Brelly -

Have you seen this? http://www.benjacobsen​photo.com …-ef-s-to-ef-conversion-2/

IMHO, jimewall gave the response that jives with me: if you need/want f/2.8, save up for the 16-35, otherwise the 17-40 is a very good lens for a FF body. For landscapes I usually stop down to f/8, unless light is at a premium and tripod is not available, so the 16-35 vs 17-40 will be a wash there (the extra mm won't be that noticeable, IMHO).

OTOH, your 650D 10-22 combo gives you pretty close to the same performance. I have to admit, there are times I wonder whether it was worth getting a 17-40 for my 5DII, when that other combo works seemingly just as well for almost all of my applications. Slightly better high-ISO performance is one edge to the 5DII, which can make up for aperture a bit.

If you find the 6D body is really performing that much better than your 650D, then indeed, go for a 17-40.

Look at it this way - if you buy either the 16-35 or 17-40 and don't really feel they are worth it, you can sell them for a high-percent of their purchase price. Or you could sell off your 10-22. Keep your 650D though, simply because bodies don't hold their value, and having a back-up could be very useful one day.

Again, IMHO, YMMV,

shinksma