Quote:I like this idea a lot. You can use this super quality zoom on APS-C (where it is a normal zoom) and FF where it is wide zoom. Then you can pick out one or two primes for speed. I sort of like the EF 35 f/2 IS. As for wider primes, I'm not all that sure. Everyone hates the Sam Yang 14mm, I guess, but it would be wide on aps-c and crazy on FF. And having that 16-35L is what makes it all possible, because when you just want general shooting you will have the a lens as solid as a rock!Unless you get a dud copy / damaged 16-35/4 L IS, you're not going to be disappointed. It really is that good. At one time I was shooting an architectural scene - a large cathedral with the sky and pavement around - and I went for f/4 aperture to preserve some of the vignetting (although it would have looked a good deal more, ahem, "artistic" on FF than on APS-H). I was hard pressed to find any differences in sharpness - corners included - viz a reference f/8 shot.
Rover, I think you sold ME on it!
Quote:Guys I already own the Tokina 16-28f2.8 it has a very decent performance , however I'd prefer a tiny prime, I will easily go for the old 35mm f2.0 rather the new IS one for the same reason.It's a f/2.8 zoom, you can't get away from physics. Get over it, the modern quality lenses are, as a rule, large. There are exceptions (say, the 40/2.8 pancake) that only further prove the rule. BTW, the 40mm could be your thing. It destroys the 35/2 in the IQ comparison (including at f/2.8 - at least off the dead center) and could be a better pair with your 16-28 because there is a bigger FL separation.
BTW my tokina 16-28 weighs almost one kilogram alone
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revie...&APIComp=2