Which better on full frame - 17-40L vs. 16-35L

[microbike]

I'm using a Canon 17-40L on my mkIII 5D, but handheld indoors (strip lights - library type environment) I'm experiencing some pretty hefty vignetting when using wide open with Aperture RAW processing.

I read somewhere that Canon's 16-35 L is better matched to full frame - can thus be true? Any evidence around?

Cheers.

 

[a1ex2001]

It is better, see photozone for reviews but it's still hardly stellar your much better off accepting it and correcting in post which most modern software can do automatically.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

It is better, see photozone for reviews but it's still hardly stellar your much better off accepting it and correcting in post which most modern software can do automatically.

but software can't fix very soft sides on 17-40. 16-35mm is much better lens, to be fair still far from stellar for more than double price. All better alternatives are manual focus (zeiss 21 or nikon 14-24 with adapter). Or if you can use 24-70mm f/2.8L, then that is the easy way out.

 

[HoppyUK]

I'm using a Canon 17-40L on my mkIII 5D, but handheld indoors (strip lights - library type environment) I'm experiencing some pretty hefty vignetting when using wide open with Aperture RAW processing.

I read somewhere that Canon's 16-35 L is better matched to full frame - can thus be true? Any evidence around?

Cheers.

No. None.

Biggest difference by far is f/2.8 and price. You will get some vignetting with any superwide, bar none, but easily corrected in post processing.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

No. None.

Biggest difference by far is f/2.8 and price. You will get some vignetting with any superwide, bar none, but easily corrected in post processing.

and the fact 17-40 is too soft in the corners till f/11, while 16-35 is ok before f/8. That is a big difference.

 

[HoppyUK]

and the fact 17-40 is too soft in the corners till f/11, while 16-35 is ok before f/8. That is a big difference.

Big difference? One stop?

If you really want sharp corners, then you need a very expensive prime at f/8. What is it that's so important that you're always going on about the corners of your landscapes Daugirdas? Couldn't you just move them over a bit?

PS Must say you've got some cracking good images tho bud

 

[a1ex2001]

but software can't fix very soft sides on 17-40. 16-35mm is much better lens, to be fair still far from stellar for more than double price. All better alternatives are manual focus (zeiss 21 or nikon 14-24 with adapter). Or if you can use 24-70mm f/2.8L, then that is the easy way out.

OP never mentioned soft corners so neither did I.

I love your obsession with soft corners and your detest of sigma lenses it brightens my day.