I finally pulled the trigger on the R6 Mark II and now Im scrambling because I have this big trip to Zion and Bryce Canyon coming up in about three weeks and I realize I dont have a proper wide lens for the landscapes. I've been looking at the RF 14-35mm f/4L and the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L and honestly Im stuck between them.
The logic was that the 15-35 f/2.8 is obviously the pro choice and it has the faster aperture but it costs way more and its heavy to hike with. I found a used one for like $1900 which is pushing my budget but doable. On the other hand, the 14-35 f/4 is cheaper, lighter, and that extra 1mm at the wide end actually seems kind of useful for those big canyon views? But then I worry about if I want to do any astrophotography while I'm out there... f/4 might be a bit slow for the stars.
I also saw the little 16mm f/2.8 prime which is dirt cheap but I feel like I'll miss the zoom. Budget is strictly under $2000 total so I cant get both. Is the f/4 sharpness good enough on the R6II sensor or should I just suck it up and get the heavy f/2.8? My back is already hurting thinking about the hike...
Honestly, the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM was disappointing for me. Unfortunately, the heavy vignetting is problematic... you should probably just buy the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM.
Listen, for hiking Zion you will totally regret the weight of the 2.8! The Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM is an amazing piece of glass and the sharpness is fantastic on that R6II sensor.
- Way lighter for those long treks
- 14mm is noticeably wider than 15mm
- Better close-up macro capability Honestly, just pick up the Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM for your astro shots. You can easily get both and stay way under your budget!
Re: "Listen, for hiking Zion you will totally regret the weight of the 2.8!"
- I actually disagree slightly on the trade-off here because of those astro concerns you mentioned. I have been extremely satisfied with the results of the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM for night sky work, and trying to push f/4 for the Milky Way usually ends up with way too much noise, even on a sensor as good as the R6 Mark II. If you really want to save your back and your wallet tho, here is my direct tip:
- Get the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM for the daytime landscapes.
- Pick up the Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM specifically for when the stars come out. You can easily get both for way under $2000 total. The 16mm prime is so tiny you wont even notice it in your pack, and it solves the speed issue perfectly. No complaints about the sharpness on that setup at all.
No way, I literally just dealt with this yesterday. Small world.
Checking in a bit late here. For hiking in dusty canyon environments like Zion, you want gear that just works without failing. Here is how I see the options for your R6 II setup:
- Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM: This is the most reliable choice if you really want to do astro. The build quality is top tier. Its heavy, but you wont be struggling with high ISO noise at night.
- Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM: A very sharp performer for daytime landscapes. The weight savings are nice for long hikes. However, f/4 is pushing it for the stars unless you have a tracker.
- Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM: Its a decent budget option but lacks the weather sealing of the L-series. Given the sand and wind in those parks, I dont trust it as much as the professional zooms. If you want the safest bet for the whole trip, get the f/2.8. Its better to carry the extra weight than regret missing those milky way shots.
