Wide angle lens
Sep 30, 2016 15:20:49 #
romanticf16
Loc: Commerce Twp, MI
BillG wrote:
$500-700
KEH Camera Brokers has a huge sale on used equipment going on NOW. I'd shop there for good Canon optics within your budget. They have a high reputation and a return if unhappy policy.
Sep 30, 2016 17:38:07 #
I have a 6D and recently got the 16-35 f4. Here's what Ken Rockwell had to say about it when released:
"The 16-35mm f/4 L IS is the sharpest ultrawide lens ever made by Canon. This new lens is by far the best ever from Canon for nature, landscape, interior, real estate, general architecture and outdoor photography."
I've been using it extensively and just love it. It's a little more than you want to pay ($999 at B&H), but it is really a stunning lens.
"The 16-35mm f/4 L IS is the sharpest ultrawide lens ever made by Canon. This new lens is by far the best ever from Canon for nature, landscape, interior, real estate, general architecture and outdoor photography."
I've been using it extensively and just love it. It's a little more than you want to pay ($999 at B&H), but it is really a stunning lens.
Sep 30, 2016 17:46:53 #
LiamRowan wrote:
I have a 6D and recently got the 16-35 f4. Here's what Ken Rockwell had to say about it when released:
"The 16-35mm f/4 L IS is the sharpest ultrawide lens ever made by Canon. This new lens is by far the best ever from Canon for nature, landscape, interior, real estate, general architecture and outdoor photography."
I've been using it extensively and just love it. It's a little more than you want to pay ($999 at B&H), but it is really a stunning lens.
"The 16-35mm f/4 L IS is the sharpest ultrawide lens ever made by Canon. This new lens is by far the best ever from Canon for nature, landscape, interior, real estate, general architecture and outdoor photography."
I've been using it extensively and just love it. It's a little more than you want to pay ($999 at B&H), but it is really a stunning lens.
The problem with Ken Rockwell is that EVERYTHING is the "Best" or "Sharpest" whenever it comes out, consistency nor accuracy of evaluations has ever been his strong suit.
Sep 30, 2016 23:20:34 #
MT Shooter wrote:
The problem with Ken Rockwell is that EVERYTHING is the "Best" or "Sharpest" whenever it comes out, consistency nor accuracy of evaluations has ever been his strong suit.
I have heard that criticism before, but advice from him I have followed has been quite accurate. In the case of this lens, it seems every bit as sharp as my 100-400 ii. My impression is that it is sharper than my 70-200 f4, which has a pretty good reputation as well. Also, if you read multiple reviews you can get a pretty good sense of what's believable and accurate.
Rockwell also has a page devoted to comparing the sharpness of Canon wide angles: http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/comparisons/ultrawide/sharpness.htm. So it's not all superlatives about whatever lens.
I also meant to mention the IS on this lens seems particularly good. My first outing I took about 30 handheld shots and did not delete one due to poor focus. That's not my usual experience, and in subsequent use the experience has been close to that.
Sep 30, 2016 23:32:38 #
jerryc41 wrote:
I've used Tokina lenses with good results.
I'll second that. I have the Tokina 16-28 and I get quality shots for my real estate photography. At least my clients seem to think so.
Oct 2, 2016 10:05:04 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.