Canon 16-35mm options

G

Giles2373

Suspended / Banned
Messages
407
Name
Giles
Edit My Images
No
I've decided my next lens is going to be a Canon 16-35mm, but just as I had about set my mind on the 2.8II, they announce the 2.3III. There is however a hefty price difference although as discussed elsewhere on the forum this would probably reduce over time.
However, looking at reviews, they seem to suggest part of the advantage of the new version is that it should exceed the old version "as the F4 has already done".
So does anyone have any experience with the F2.8 and F4.0 and if so, is it worth spending more for the current F2.8? I appreciate the extra stop (although the F4.0 is stabilised), but would anyone adamantly argue in favour of one over the other?
 
Looks like the new iii is almost 3x the price of the F4, so unless you really need that extra stop this puts the F4 ahead for me. Personally I got the F4 IS and have been very happy. For Astro long exposures I recently added a star tracker which is not very expensive and still leaves a lot of change vs the new 2.8 iii.
 
Thanks - that was my line of thinking. I believe the F4 also takes 77mm filters as opposed to 82mm which saves me some money as well. For the current cost of the mk3 i could buy the F4 and a prime if I felt so inclined (but i dont). Nice to hear that the F4 is well regarded by people actually using it as opposed to just the review sites.
 
Correct the f4 takes standard 77mm which is handy.
 
Ordered this evening from Jessops and should get cashback from Canon, so really is far better than the other two price wise and I cant justify the extra for one stop, especially as it has IS anyway.
 
In the meantime have fun indoors taking wall to wall shots from the corner of your room :)
 
Giles2373 said:
Already arrived and now just looking forward to getting out and using it. Looks like rain this evening though.
Click to expand...

Meh, it's weather sealed (with a filter) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top