08-01-2015 07:14 PM
That's a rather secialized lens. In addition to being very expensive, it's very large and heavy. If you aren't certain that you need it, you should probably not buy it.
08-01-2015 08:26 PM
08-02-2015 02:11 PM
If you frequently take photos where 16mm isn't wide enough for you and you have ~$2000 to spend on a lens its a great lens. I say ~$2000 since its a $3000 lens but you could sell the 16-35 and cover 11-400mm with three lenses. But, as Bob says, its a specialty lens; even a hundred occurences where you want wider than 16 would be $20 a shot.
I know from listening to podcasts that some pros have sold several lenses that the 11-24 overlap becuase of its quality and the fact that they can cut down what they trravel with.
08-02-2015 07:25 PM
08-02-2015 08:07 PM
Given that additional info I would say its not the lens for you.
You have a great kit with the FF body and three excellent L grade lenses.
The only thing between you and some great photos is practise and availing yourself of the many free or reasonably priced video training courses from sites such as Udemy, Craftsy or Linda.com.
08-02-2015 08:39 PM
08-02-2015 09:23 PM
Saw a recommendation on this forum for the B.Peterson book, Understanding Exposure. Ordered it, will be here tomorrow. This forum is so helpful, and yes I'm watching the videos as recommended. I live 12 miles from Canon's Jamesburg NJ location, recently had my camera in for repair.. Oh they are so nice.i joined CPS, platinum member, this week. With living so close I will take advantage of their cleanings etc. Warning, I'm lurking and trying to grasp all of this.. Thanks again....
Your situation is a bit unusual, in that it's rare for a relatively new user to start out so well equipped. We'll be interested to hear how things work out for you as you get more experience.
I too am a CPS member (several of us are, I think), and I share your opinion of the Jamesburg shop. My wife and I stop there to drop off cameras and lenses for cleaning on our way home from visits to our daughter's house in Philadelphia. The people there have always been extremely efficient and helpful.
08-06-2015 01:11 AM
The 11-24mm is a fabulous lens, but as mentioned already, heavy and pricey.
It also has a strongly convex front element, that means it cannot be used with standard filters.
The way I often use a lens of this type - for outdoor, scenic shots - I know I'll want to be able to use a Circular Polarizer, especially... as well as a Neutral Density or two. So I would be more inclined to get a 16-35mm or 17-40mm. In fact, I'd probably get the EF 16-35/4 IS USM. It can share 77mm filters with lenses like the 24-105 and 100-400mm, and is not only less expensive and smaller/lighter than the f2.8 lens, it's also sharper from corner to corner. And f4 is plenty fast for practically all outdoor, wide angle shooting needs.
08-06-2015 07:01 AM
I currently have the EF16-35mm 2.8L. Thank you for the information on the Circular Polarizer. I'm currently on B&H's website researching the information you provided.
I've learned so much this week about my camera, so appreciate this great forum. Will share some pictures....