Hi guys! Sorry about making ANOTHER lens vs lens thread, but I have a relatively specific question.
I'm upgrading from my 300D into a 1DMKII, right now i'm moving from the equivalent 28mm into something wider, which is easier to get on the 1.3 crop factor 1DMKII. My needs are...
- I will be using it almost always at minimum aperture, therefore the wide aperture on the prime lens is not important to me.
- I will be using it on the widest angle setting possible. So when looking at the 17-40mm look only at the 17mm end.
- This is going to go on the 1DMKII, not the 300D.
- Sharpness is VERY VERY important.
- Minimising Barrell Distortion is VERY VERY important.
If the 17mm has LESS distortion than even the 20mm prime, and it's they are both relatively sharp as each other (at wide angle setting) than i'd definately opt for the 17.
However... I heard the 17-40 at 17mm isn't all that sharp, and being more wide angle i'd suspect it to show more barrell distortion than the 20mm prime. I just like the sound of a prime lens because it gives me the impression that it would have far superior performance over the 17-40mm. But like I said, the sharpness and barrell distortion mean alot more to me than getting just alittle bit more wide angle. Both lenses end up giving me more coverage than the kit lens at the moment anyway when I put these new lenses on the 1DMKII.
I'm not knowing which one of these lenses to get, if you couldh elp me out that would be great!
If you're curious as to what strange application i'm needing this wide angle lens for, it's for this http://home.iprimus.com.au/easton/motion/motion8.jpg then you'll know why I need this particular type of wide angle. Small aperture, big F number, wider angle, minimum barrell distortion possible and maximum sharpness attainable.
Thanks guys!
I'm upgrading from my 300D into a 1DMKII, right now i'm moving from the equivalent 28mm into something wider, which is easier to get on the 1.3 crop factor 1DMKII. My needs are...
- I will be using it almost always at minimum aperture, therefore the wide aperture on the prime lens is not important to me.
- I will be using it on the widest angle setting possible. So when looking at the 17-40mm look only at the 17mm end.
- This is going to go on the 1DMKII, not the 300D.
- Sharpness is VERY VERY important.
- Minimising Barrell Distortion is VERY VERY important.
If the 17mm has LESS distortion than even the 20mm prime, and it's they are both relatively sharp as each other (at wide angle setting) than i'd definately opt for the 17.
However... I heard the 17-40 at 17mm isn't all that sharp, and being more wide angle i'd suspect it to show more barrell distortion than the 20mm prime. I just like the sound of a prime lens because it gives me the impression that it would have far superior performance over the 17-40mm. But like I said, the sharpness and barrell distortion mean alot more to me than getting just alittle bit more wide angle. Both lenses end up giving me more coverage than the kit lens at the moment anyway when I put these new lenses on the 1DMKII.
I'm not knowing which one of these lenses to get, if you couldh elp me out that would be great!
If you're curious as to what strange application i'm needing this wide angle lens for, it's for this http://home.iprimus.com.au/easton/motion/motion8.jpg then you'll know why I need this particular type of wide angle. Small aperture, big F number, wider angle, minimum barrell distortion possible and maximum sharpness attainable.
Thanks guys!