I’d been using the Canon 30D for almost two years — until recently. With it, I had the 16-35/2.8 lens, which paired well with the camera’s 1.6 sensor crop.
Now that I have a full-frame camera, my heart is set on the 24-70/2.8. (Yes, I love primes as much as anyone else.) Several people, including Jeff, have advised me to sell the 16-35, especially since its wide-angle spectrum becomes super-wide on a full-frame.
Well, I can’t and I won’t. I used my 16-35 on a full-frame for the first time while at Poynter this summer, and I absolutely loved it. As much as I want/need to add the 24-70 to my arsenal, I’m not doing it by selling my 16-35.
On a very related note, I tagged along with Jeff during one of his Columbia Missourian photo shifts last week while I was in Columbia. For one quasi-enterprise assignment, he went to photograph the two rather large cranes on campus.
These two industrial cranes are being used to help construct a new seven-story patient tower for the hospital. The path of a passing airplane adds a nice touch to this sunset silhouette shot. This was shot from the top of a parking garage.
While I went to the side of the parking garage to make the above picture, Jeff noticed a puddle and decided to try to make a reflection picture. His first attempts were not up to his (or my) standards, and he moved on.
After I made a few standard pictures, I went to the puddle to see what I could do with it. Quickly realizing that crouching down and pressing the shutter button wouldn’t work, I got down and dirty — by lying down on my stomach. And, careful not to get my scarf or jacket or camera in the puddle and using my 50mm, I got this shot:
Shot with the 50/1.8.
Then I changed lenses and used my trusty 16-35.
Shot with the 16-35/2.8, at 16mm (and later cropped from the top and bottom). Much more epic.
After I showed Jeff my results and told him not to be afraid of getting down and dirty, he immediately did the same and was able to make the picture he’d wanted to get.
Make sure you check out his eventual photo — as well as his picture of my getting the shot.
Back to the issue of wide-angle lenses on full-frames. Yes, sometimes the results are slightly ridiculous. But as you can see, the frame with the 50mm wasn’t large enough to capture the tops of the cranes without losing the border of the puddle. Tally up one more reason for me to hold on to my 16-35.
Based on Jeff’s photo it looks like you could add a gallon of distilled water to your arsenal and do pretty well too.
Haha! That’s only vaguely unethical. 🙂
Sorry, forgot you were journos.
[…] few minutes later, Chris, who was with me, showed me a shot she took that had most of the reflection in it. I went back and tried again, this time lying prone […]
I really like my 24mm 2.8 prime, maybe that would be a good addition for your full frame? In fact that lens rarely comes off my camera.
Love the shots by the way, nice light!
Primes are definitely tempting, especially since they’re small and not as unwieldy/intimidating to subjects. But I used the 24-70 with the 5DII for this project, and kinda fell in love with the combination. I think as a photojournalist, I prefer zooms, but if I were a hobby/art photographer, I’d absolutely go with primes.
Thanks, btw! It was a gorgeous sunset (shot the same night as this.) I actually have one more post coming up that’ll feature another photo from that same evening/light.
I’m never giving up my wide angle either. I have a 10-22 on a 30D so it’s pretty much exactly like your 16-35 on your Mk II. While I have to watch out for stretching heads on the corners of the frame, I’ve loved using it ever since I got it.