www.testfreaks.com

Reviews, reviews, reviews...

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
8.1 out of 10

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Built for professionals or the serious amateur photographer, the Read more

Great Deal: $1,329.00

Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Showing 1-10 of 19
Overall 4
4.0

Way too soft

Crash, B&H Photo
2 November 2015
  • Excerpt: This lens is softer toward the edges than the version 1 that I had, but reportedly within specs. As I get more clients wanting finished pieces over 5', the softness of this lens is hurting my business.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

Not Sharp

Aggie shooter, B&H Photo
23 November 2013
  • Excerpt: I've had my copy over a year. In my experience, it isn't sharp through much of its range and seldom comes out of the bag. I sent it to Canon repair on the East Coast. They checked it out, sent it back, said it operates within parameters. Whose parameters?
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

I guess I got a bad copy

Wapas, B&H Photo
9 December 2012
  • Excerpt: I have to say, I am a little suprised by all the reviews I have read regarding bad copies of a lens. I am shocked that at this price point, canon does not have some better quality control. These must be streaming out of china now or something.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

OK but not worth the price

airplanes, B&H Photo
30 May 2012
  • Excerpt: I bought this to use it mostly at 16mm with my 5D ii. I knew that it wouldn't be completely sharp wide open but was really disappointed at the outer edges even at f8. It was not sharp in the outer 1/5th of both sides (right a little worse than left).
  • Read full review
Overall 3
3.0

User Review

alexander65, Fredmiranda
3 August 2011
  • Conclusion: Bought this lens 2 years ago and never was really happy. The middle, as expected, is sharp, BUT on a fullframe body like the 5dMkII you quickly see the not so impressive corners and edges: they are soft, absolutely not sharp, even going at f8, where every lens should shine.
  • Pros: Middle was sharp, lightweight compared to 2,8
  • Cons: Corners never sharp, big minus in architecture; Competitors do it better for even less money
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

Canon 16-35 mm L II E-

Tod Burns, Adorama
8 January 2010
  • Excerpt: I purchased a refurbished 1D MK III from Adorama and was ecstatic. I purchased an "E-", a used 16-35 mm L II from Adorama, no hood, no bag, generic poor fitting front of lens cap (these items are included with a new purchase. I won't be buying used from Adorama again (refurbished or new only)
  • Pros: Lightweight
  • Cons: Not the usual"pin sharp"
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Tod Burns, Adorama
8 January 2010
  • Excerpt: I purchased a refurbished 1D MK III from Adorama and was ecstatic. I purchased an "E-", a used 16-35 mm L II from Adorama, no hood, no bag, generic poor fitting front of lens cap (these items are included with a new purchase. I won't be buying used from Adorama again (refurbished or new only)
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Tod Burns, Adorama
7 January 2010
  • Excerpt: I purchased a refurbished 1D MK III from Adorama and was ecstatic. I purchased an "E-", a used 16-35 mm L II from Adorama, no hood, no bag, generic poor fitting front of lens cap (these items are included with a new purchase. I won't be buying used from Adorama again (refurbished or new only)
  • Read full review
Overall 3
3.0

User Review

matty lough, Fredmiranda
22 August 2008
  • Conclusion: This lens is supposed to take pictures at focal lengths from 16mm to 35mm. If we essentially take this to be 20 individual focal lengths, then only 8 of those are fully fit for purpose.
  • Pros: Good build quality
  • Cons: Poor performance across a wide range of focal lengths and f-stops. Very expensive for what you do get.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

dprees, Fredmiranda
27 June 2008
  • Conclusion: Finally decided to pop for one of these, and ordered one from a reputable HK dealer. Lens arrived, and initial impressions from handling the lens were good. However, first images did not impress, and so I set up comparative tests with other lenses covering equivalent focal lengths, using LiveView on...
  • Pros: Good build quality, my copy had reasonable IQ at 16mm to 24mm.
  • Cons: Poor IQ at 28mm, and terrible IQ at 35mm (significantly worse than old 18-55mm kit lens at ALL apertures).
  • Read full review
Next page >>