Thoughts on Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8 L ii

[khairka9]

What’s the reason that this one gets a bad name and less recommended than version 1 as well.

I am getting a new one for $500 but all the negative comments and lack of popularity is making me think twice.

I will use it for landscapes and may try for milkyway photography.

Have an APS-C camera

[Waddizzle]

“ Those pics still look great to me!!!  Lovely reflection. “

Thanks, Rick.  You are not alone with your opinion.  I love them. These photos have a short back story.

The images were captured during the pre-dawn hours. The 35mm photo is pointing toward the upcoming sunrise.  

i had noticed that peak high tide coincided with the summer equinox, the transition from spring to summer.

I had taken several photos before and after the moment of transition.  But something I did not expect happened at the moment of high tide and the equinox. 

You are looking at the Atlantic Ocean.  The water waves suddenly came to an absolute standstill for a few seconds. The water suddenly turned into a sheet of glass with a beautiful sky above it. 

Waves were moving toward me, time suddenly time stopped, and waves reappeared moving away from me. 

[ebiggs1]

"Those pics still look great to me!!!  Lovely reflection."

They look OK to me too as most landscapes do (version one) because you can't really see the edge distortion. If it was a group of people the folks on the ends would look uncomfortably fat. And that ain't a good selling point. There is a big difference between someone out playing for funsy taking nice colorful landscapes and someone trying to sell his work.