Search
-
Re: FF equivilent for 17-55 f2.8 IS?
Have been using the 5D for almost 2 years, enjoy the view end on the full frame body. The 24-105 F4 L IS is a great lens for the 5D. Good for most of wedding shots and portraits, lanscape. The 16-35 F2.8 is really great but just too expensive. I got the 17-40 and working fine. The ultrawide angle for wedding photo is… -
Re: FF equivilent for 17-55 f2.8 IS?
I can vouch for the 16-35 f/2.8L II. It's my next lens purchase for sure. My colleague has it and I've borrowed it a few times. It's very similar in size to the 24-105 but seems slightly narrower and lighter in weight. I would actually say it's more similar to the 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 but a little heavier and longer. Sort of… -
Re: FF equivilent for 17-55 f2.8 IS?
Hey Shima, I'm a Nikon guy, but a lot of Canon wedding photographers I know swear by the 16-35 f2.8L (I think I've gotten it right) lens as their wide zoom, especially on the full frame bodies. A killer combination would be this lens on a 5D or 5DMkII (personally for weddings I'd probably get the original 5D - I'll bet… -
Re: FF equivilent for 17-55 f2.8 IS?
http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/photo.aspx?gallery=canoneos5dmkii_preview&photo=8 There's a sample shot with at 16-35 at 16mm on the pre-production 5d Mk II.... If the 17-55 is equivalent to 20 something, makes me think a 24-70 might be more suited to matching it focal wise... especially since I really dislike that type of… -
Re: FF equivilent for 17-55 f2.8 IS?
I would very much like that, thanks Tim. I was thinking last night how sad it is that I'm not close to B&H (like I am when I visit my folks) otherwise I would just hop on the train, spend a day in NYC, and play around with the lens options on my cameras to get a feel for them. I love my 17-55... and I am poor so if I do…
15 results