Looking For A Similar Lens To Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens

[tsteezyj]

I'm looking for a similar lens to the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM lens that will fit on my Canon T6i.

Does anyone have any reccomenedations?

Thanks!

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

I don't know how good the f4 version of the 16-35mm is, since I have never used one.  I do know I will not buy a f2.8 16-35mm version again. I do have that version and replaced it with the excellent Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 FF Lens for Canon EF.  You will like the Tok!

---

I've been very happy with the f/4 version. I bought it because it was considered to be a bit sharper than the original release of the f/2.8, which was current at the time. (And because I saw it as an outdoor lens. For the event photography I was doing at the time, I rarely used a WA lens indoors.) When the f/2.8 Mk II came out, it was highly regarded by the critics, who pronounced it at least as sharp as the f/4. Frankly, Ernie, I thought I remembered you as one of those praising it at the time, but I guess I was wrong about that.

---

When I am shooting at f/2.8, the edges of the frame are usually outside of the DoF.  In other words, soft corners are a "don't care condition" as far as I am concerned.  What I focus on is always tack sharp.  When I want sharp corners, I stop down the aperture.  

"All gear has limits!"

Famous last words, that are actually good advice.  Take advantage of those limits.  If the limits are too confining go for you.......  

[ebiggs1]

"All gear has limits!"

But only an idiot buys a lens with a f2.8 aperture and says oh well it is just it's limit that I can't use it.

"Famous last words, that are actually good advice."

WHen all you do is fool around and hobby photos of a balloon or a bridge or a mountain and crop off the edges, yeah, it's a pretty good lens. But than some people are happy with a cardboard box for a camera.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"All gear has limits!"

But only an idiot buys a lens with a f2.8 aperture and says oh well it is just it's limit that I can't use it.

"Famous last words, that are actually good advice."

WHen all you do is fool around and hobby photos of a balloon or a bridge or a mountain and crop off the edges, yeah, it's a pretty good lens. But than some people are happy with a cardboard box for a camera.

---

Good thing that is not what I said.  What I said was that the sharpest lenses tend to have the widest apertures.  And, there is no law that says you must ALWAYS shoot at the widest aperture of the lens.  When I do shoot at f/2.8, the corners tend to be outside of the DoF, anyway.

Did you know that you can use PS to see where the plane of focus of lens lies?  You should try it before you try to take a group shot again.  Take a photo of large grassy area.  Set something in the field of view to focus on.  

Even better, test some of your group shots that you have already taken.  I mean, who really knows where the plane of focus of a lens actually lies.  Is it flat?  If it is curved, then how much does it curve?  PS can show you where the DoF and Focus Plane are.

I know you hate AFMA adjustments, but for benefit of others.  PS can take the subjective guesswork out of the equation when it comes to judging where the plane of focus is, and where the edges of the DoF are.  

[ FILTER : STYLIZE : FIND EDGES ]. Easy as pie, not more subjective guesswork.

[ebiggs1]

Oh my thanx for that. If I only had you close by to teach me how to use Photoshop, how much better my life could be.

"...only an idiot buys a lens with a f2.8 aperture and says oh well it is just it's limit that I can't use it."

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Oh my thanx for that. If I only had you close by to teach me how to use Photoshop, how much better my life could be.

"...only an idiot buys a lens with a f2.8 aperture and says oh well it is just it's limit that I can't use it."

---

Make no mistake.  Your really nasty post that got deleted did not go unnoticed.  You have serious isssues.  

[ebiggs1]

"Frankly, Ernie, I thought I remembered you as one of those praising it at the time, but I guess I was wrong about that."

No, Robert, you remember correctly. At first I was happy until I started to see problems when large groups were the subject.  Any WA lens can do a simple landscape.  When people that are standing on the ends of a large group look like they put on 25 lbs, it ain't so good.