Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
Showing 1-10 of 33
no sharp at all
11 September 2014
Conclusion: This is the third time i try to make a review. Honestly i don't understand why do you reject. Anyhow let talk a bit about this lens. I got a brand new lens, and i think it is defected and not sharp at all.
Excerpt: I'm using this lens with a T2i, I've had it for almost 2 years. I hate to throw cold water on everyone's reviews but I can't rave about the lens. Yes, it can take good pictures, I've used it as the basic lens on this camera along with a EF 70-200 L and I haven't felt the need for a 50mm lens for...
Excerpt: Landscape, closeups. Everything you would expect quality wise from an L series. Image Stabilization is not included. Not a primary lens, limited useage. I do recommend this lens if you're looking for greated range than the 24-105 provides and there is a significant difference in shot capabilities...
Pros: Consistent Output, Durable, Easily Interchangeable, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Nice Bokeh, Rugged, Strong Construction
Summary: This is not a particularly sharp lens. I use a 5D3 and my other two L-series lenses, the 35mm f/1.4L and the 70-200mm f/4L IS, are very sharp lenses. The 70-200mm is sharp at all focal lengths and wide open at f/4, and the 35mm f/1.4 is sharp wide open at 1.4 also.
Excerpt: To be honest I have been disappointed with this lens and just emailed Canon to ask about returning it. For an L lens it has never given me the clarity I think an L lens should have. I might have got a bad copy but really cant tell.
Excerpt: Use this mostly for three dimensional installation artworks and for architectural shots. Lens is a bit soft at the widest aperture 16mm, but makes up for that by being able to shoot in low light conditions.
Pros: Consistent Output, Easily Interchangeable, Fast / accurate auto-focus