Hello!!! I would like to ask for a help to all of you pro out there who have tested the two lens from Canon EFs 17-55 f2.8 ISUSM and EF 16-35 f2.8L USM. Photography is my hobby and I like shooting interior architecture. I'm planning to acquire a new wide lens that will satisfy my hobby. Thinking (wishful) of creating a book in the future for all the photographs that will be acquired so a good lens is a must. My current gear is EOS 30D, EF24-85 f3.5-4.5USM, EF50 f/1.8II, EF 70-200 f/4L. I cannot decide which lens among the two (17-55 or 16-35) to buy so your inputs will be highly appreciated. TIA...Cheers!

How much of a price difference between the two lenses?

I've tried both of them and for a 1.6x crop factor camera... 16mm or 17mm will do the trick most of the time. It only becomes a problem as more real-estate gets smaller and smaller (like condominiums, hotel rooms and beach cottages) and you won't be able to zoom out with your feet since you are confined in a closed space.

I'm curious that fast lenses are a major factor in your choices. Although a fast lens is always a good thing, for your specific application it isn't really as vital since good interior shots are always staged using a tripod and small apertures (F5.6 & smaller) to keep as much of the interior details in focus.

If price isn't an issue, the 16-35 should serve you very well into the future until you go full frame.

Just consider the following;

A EF 17-40 is a lot cheaper since F2.8 aperture isn't necessary for interior shots.
A EFS 17-55 will just mean you can also use it for other purposes (like low-light handheld situations).
A EFS 10-22 is the widest zoom lens available and can handle the most cramped spaces (like walk-in closets or bathrooms).

Other choices are just more specialized (like Tilt Shift lenses) which will do an even better job.

Good Luck.

Dave is right, if you plan to shoot interiors best to use a tripod and high aperture value so the 17-40L (around P37T) will do. The 16-35L is the best available 2.8 wide angle zoom but at around double the price of the 17-40L makes you think twice. But the shorter focal length limits its capability for everyday use.

I suggest the 17-55 f/2.8 with IS (around P54,500) which has a farther reach and is a very good lens. It actually has very good reviews all over the web and doubles as a walk-around lens for your 30D. The images you can capture with this lens will be comparable with the L lenses and print-worthy for your picture book.

hi. im having the same dilemma as dave. couldn't decide which to buy. i like the 16-35L to complete my f/2.8 collection (24-70L & 70-200L ISU) and that it's heavy-duty and future-proof (read: full frame). i like the EF-S 17-55 ISU because it will complement my 350D & 30D very well and the IS feature not found in the 16-35L, which i really like because i like to shoot in low light.
ditoy, when you say that price (54k), is it from Quiapo? i was offered a price of 79k (75k, discounted just for me) from a reputable store (not in Quiapo mind you). i want to know the real prices of these two from Quiapo...

Baka sa US source ni ditoy :D US$1,179 at B&H.

hi. im having the same dilemma as dave. couldn't decide which to buy. i like the 16-35L to complete my f/2.8 collection (24-70L & 70-200L ISU) and that it's heavy-duty and future-proof (read: full frame). i like the EF-S 17-55 ISU because it will complement my 350D & 30D very well and the IS feature not found in the 16-35L, which i really like because i like to shoot in low light.
ditoy, when you say that price (54k), is it from Quiapo? i was offered a price of 79k (75k, discounted just for me) from a reputable store (not in Quiapo mind you). i want to know the real prices of these two from Quiapo...

Last I asked the 16-35 was P70T in quiapo, the 17-55 IS P54,500 price was quoted by Henry's quiapo as promo to Pipho when it first arrived. Best guys, call them tomorrow henrys 733-7723.

Thanks Guys for the inputs. The price difference for the two lens is about 20K++. Not really a fast lens is the major factor in deciding which lens to get. It is just that I really dont know what to get. Dave and Ditoy thanks for the inputs, it was well explained. The only problem I have in mind if I'll opted for the 17-55 is not an L lens. You know, I have a mentality that if its not an L lens, it is not a good lens. Well, thats me. But if you will say that this lens is comparable to an L, I think I will stick with this lens. But as Dave said that I dont need a fast 2.8 lens which most of the times I'll be using 5.6, maybe I'll get the 17-40 f/4L. Whew, so hard to decide....anyway, could you please tell me what are the other apllication of the 2.8 fast lens aside from shooting hand held on a low light condition? Thank you very much....

IS will enable you to handhold a bit longer, faster apertures for faster shutter speeds beneficial to indoor photography with or without flash. I am guessing this will be your most used lens so it will be perfect for everyday photography, portraits, events and gatherings.

Reviews said that it didn't get the L designation for its built and lack of weather-sealing, but optically up to par with the Ls.

IS will enable you to handhold a bit longer, faster apertures for faster shutter speeds beneficial to indoor photography with or without flash. I am guessing this will be your most used lens so it will be perfect for everyday photography, portraits, events and gatherings.

Reviews said that it didn't get the L designation for its built and lack of weather-sealing, but optically up to par with the Ls.


Well, I guess I have to shift my paradigm to be able to move on...If the EFs17-55 2.8 IS USM is optically at par with the L lens with added value like the IS...then this is the best candidate...do I need a Red Ring..well I guess not...I think it's the ouput that matter most and not the look on the outside...:) Cheers and Thanks a lot!

if you're shooting lots of interior shots, i suggest you dont get either lens. invest nalang on the canon 10-22 USM lens and make use of the leftover cash for a very good tripod. you can even splurge on the tripod! :)

Also a good read on a different forum with the same topic being discussed:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20675

I've been doing some research and the vignetting of the 17-55 2.8 IS is it's known weakness. Since I have an APS-C DSLR, the EF-S 17-55 would be practical to get vs. the 16-35L. It is known to be sharper than the 16-35 L and the price - less expensive. BTW, I'd take Ben C's advice for those interior shots.

if you're shooting lots of interior shots, i suggest you dont get either lens. invest nalang on the canon 10-22 USM lens and make use of the leftover cash for a very good tripod. you can even splurge on the tripod! :)

If that's the case, I can save a lot of cash because there is no need to splurge on the tripod... presently I'm using the Slik PRO 814 Carbon Fiber w/ 3way Panhead ball which is pretty stable...:)

Thanks Ben C, Ditoy Aguila and JR Diaz........ Cheers!!

for reference...

LENS PERFORMANCE SURVEY at Photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylenstxt.jsp?filter=%22brand='Canon%20EF'%20OR %20brand='Sigma%20AF'%20OR%20brand='Tamron%20AF'%2 0or%20brand='Tokina%20AF'%20or%20brand='Vivitar%20 AF'%22)

:)

I've been doing some research and the vignetting of the 17-55 2.8 IS is it's known weakness. Since I have an APS-C DSLR, the EF-S 17-55 would be practical to get vs. the 16-35L. It is known to be sharper than the 16-35 L and the price - less expensive. BTW, I'd take Ben C's advice for those interior shots.

Hi,
I think you should worry more about the flare than the vignetting. I have to order my lens hood from B&H as it didnt come with the lens. But the lens is really sharp. I had mine for two weeks now and am very happy with it. Quite expensive though.

BTW, I'm glad I found this forum. I'm a filo here in Sydney and just enjoying reading all your posts.

Cheers,

how does 17-55mm 2.8 is usm 24-70 2.8?

Hello!!! I would like to ask for a help to all of you pro out there who have tested the two lens from Canon EFs 17-55 f2.8 ISUSM and EF 16-35 f2.8L USM. Photography is my hobby and I like shooting interior architecture. I'm planning to acquire a new wide lens that will satisfy my hobby. Thinking (wishful) of creating a book in the future for all the photographs that will be acquired so a good lens is a must. My current gear is EOS 30D, EF24-85 f3.5-4.5USM, EF50 f/1.8II, EF 70-200 f/4L. I cannot decide which lens among the two (17-55 or 16-35) to buy so your inputs will be highly appreciated. TIA...Cheers!


for interior shots the wider the better plus a good tripod, canon 10-22 or sigma 10-20 just watch out for distortions...