16-35L

I have been thinking about getting another lens for my arsenal and have been looking at the 16-35L. It seems that every thread I see about it, everyone loves it. My question is, I am not sure what additional shots this will bring to the table for me. Since I have the 24-70L and the 70-200L I have most of the range covered. Do any of you that have the 24-70 also have the 16-35 and do you get much use from it? I hate to spen $1500 on something and not get much in return. I would be using it primarily on my 5D.

I personally think that the 17-40 would be just as good unless you really really need that extra stop. If it were me, i would probably be using the 17-40 for reception shots which would be flash shots.

For the price of a 16-35, you could get a 17-40 + 100mm macro, which i can see that you don't have. The 100mm macro makes a great lens for all those detail shots with the rings, flowers, glasses, shoes etc...

I second the recommendation for a macro lens. They're wonderful for detail shots.

I have been also thinking about getting a set of Kenba extension tubes for macro shots. Not sure if anyone uses them, but I have been reading a lot of good things about them in the lens forum. It looks like a lot of wildlife photog's use them........

I have a 17-40 and LOVE it. Once you put it on your 5D you'll be hooked. 17mm's is so wide. I pretty much leave it on my 5D full time.

Thanks Jamie.....I figured I would dump the "brick" as my walk-around lens and use the 16-35 instead. Just wasn't sure if it would give me that much of an advantage over the 24-70 to justify the expense. I have't found a lot that I can't do with 24-70, but have been thinking about large group shots and tight dressing rooms maybe. I was hoping to find someone who had both already to tell me what type of shots they use the 16 for vs. the 24.......

Bob, the 16-35 doesn't replace the 24-70 IMHO, but gives you a wider option when you need it. The trade off is the distortion you get. You can use the distortion to your advantage and do some cool things with it, but I avoid shooting formals with the 17-40 unless there's no other option. That's why I chose the 17-40 instead of the 16-35...I didn't have to sell my 28-70 to afford it!