canon 16-35mm 2.8 OR 27-70mm 2.8....which one?!?!?

nightspidy

Ok, so I'm stuck. I'm going to purchase another lens before my honeymoon to Nevada (Las Vegas), Arizona & New Mexico since I'm not broke enough and I'm obscessing over the fact that I don't think my lens kit is good enough for this trip to capture the variety of things I will encounter.

Currently I'm shooting with the Rebel XT, so I've got the 1.6 conversion factor. I will be taking my 70-200mm 2.8 IS, 100mm 2.8 macro (tokina), 12-24 sigma, and possibly the 17-55mm kit lens....more is better for me, I don't mind that my backpack is going to weigh the same as a baby elephant. So, I'm not sure which one to buy. I expect to take a lot of landscape pictures, indoor pics and since I will be travelling along route 66, I would like to capture a lot of the old hotel/motel architecture along with other buildings we encounter, both day and night shots. I'm leaning toward the 16-35mm right now, but feedback & opinions from people on this forum will definately make up my mind on this one. Thanks everyone! :bow

ziggy53

With the lenses you have you really need to check out the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. It would be a much better match for the system you have.

nightspidy

Ohhh, I just noticed the error of my ways....the lens choices should have read 16-35mm or 24-70mm (not 27-70mm). Unfortunatly I'm not able to buy the 17-55mm as the store were I'm charging my purchase doesn't carry that lens in the 2.8 version. That's why I'm looking at either one of the above plus adding on the 1.4 extender to my purchase for the 70-200mm 2.8 IS that I have. Otherwise I would get the 17-55mm.....

claudermilk

The 24-70 would be (and is) my choice. It would fit nicely in your lineup--and you should leave the kit lens behind in that case. My own lineup is Tokina 12-24, 24-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L, and 50/1.8. The three zooms work very nicely together, IMHO. The 24-70 has virtually no distortion, which is helpful with the architectural shots.

The only lens you mention I'd bother with a TC on is the macro. My experience with TCs on the 70-200/2.8L IS (I've only tried them on the IS version, not my current non-IS) has been poor to state it kindly. The examples I've been given to refute that opinion have invariably been wel-lit sunny days with the lens stopped down to f8-f11. In that narrow range I concede the combo works--but that's a limited range of use.

pnphoto

I have both the 16-35 and the 24-70 for my 1.3 crop factor Canons.

Tough choice.

Love the 16-35 for lots of stuff except portraits/people stuff due to distortion. The 16-35 kills if you love wide and close.

If you need walk around versatility that includes people and general travel/PJ type shooting, go 24-70.

Pete

z_28

I was big fan of 24-70L for over 3 years (used with 10D, 20D, 30D and 1D Mk.IIn) and finally switched to 16-35L

It's your exclusive choice, or buy both and test them

gryphonslair99

Well here is a suggestion that hasn't been made yet. (I don't think it has) Get them both. Having a 16-35 f2.8, 24-70f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 I find on most occasions I really don't need any of my other lenes in my bag. But it is a costly solution to your dilemma. Good luck.

nightspidy

Solution

gryphonslair99 wrote:

Well here is a suggestion that hasn't been made yet. (I don't think it has) Get them both. Having a 16-35 f2.8, 24-70f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 I find on most occasions I really don't need any of my other lenes in my bag. But it is a costly solution to your dilemma. Good luck.

Ok, so it looks like I'm going to end up buying the 24-70mm and the 1.4 extender first. Next spring, or while I'm on vacation, I will most likely end up getting the 16-35mm as well since I've heard good things about both and I can't make up my mind. I'll get the 24-70mm first so that I can pick up the 1.4 extender as well (my store card will be maxed out then) to go with my 70-200mm 2.8 IS. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

rpcrowe

claudermilk wrote:

The 24-70 would be (and is) my choice. It would fit nicely in your lineup--and you should leave the kit lens behind in that case. My own lineup is Tokina 12-24, 24-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L, and 50/1.8. The three zooms work very nicely together, IMHO. The 24-70 has virtually no distortion, which is helpful with the architectural shots.

I have basically the same setup except that I substituted the 70-200mm f/4L IS lens for the great, but heavy, f/2.8 version.

If you have two bodies (I shoot with 3 1.6x bodies) you can have an extended stepless focal range (12-70mm, 24-200mm) or a nice wide and long combination on the bodies. This will give you great image quality.

However, there are a couple of Sigma, Tamron, Tokina lenses in the focal range of 24-28mm to 70-75mm with constant f/2.8 apertures that could serve you very well as a mid-range zoom and are a lot less expensive than the 24-70mm f/2.8L. There are also third party lenses in the 17mm to 50-70mm range that also have a steady f/2.8 aperture and provide good imagery.

mmtoruno

nightspidy wrote:

I expect to take a lot of landscape pictures, indoor pics

For indoors/wide shots the Sigma 12-24 its your best bet on the crop body. People/Portraits the 70-200 2.8L IS. You want something in between go for the 24-70 2.8L good mid range and great IQ also good on portraits.

My two cents

Marvin