Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM
Showing 1-10 of 182
Everything I expected...
Addison Phillips, Amazon
3 March 2014
Summary: I agonized over purchasing this lens for a long time. I had a Tamron 16-34 that was my primary "walk around" lens that broke down on a recent trip. That lens did an "okay" job and was much much cheaper than any of the Canon lens.
Conclusion: Great value, the version II brought the price of the older version down. Was nice on the APS-C 1.6x crop 7D. Pretty sharp, shot mostly at f2.8 unless I was doing some architectural work. Fast, wide, creates some fun images.
Pros: Wide wide wide. Sharp. Fast.
Cons: Lots of distortion, good amount of vignetting.
Conclusion: This is one of my favourite lenses. Build quality is very good, along with IQ and versatility. I've recently sold this lens as I needed the funds for dedicated portrait lens due to my changing photographic style. It was such a hard decision, and do miss it for some of it's unique qualities.
Pros: Build quality, IQ, Focal length, sharpness, light but well built, great walk about lens.
Cons: Very soft around the edges at 2.8 on a full frame body!
Conclusion: This was my first Canon "L" series lens. I am using it now on a Canon 60D, with an APS-C sensor. So far, I am very pleased with the results. I can't wait to try it on a camera with a full frame sensor. It blows the other lenses I have out of the water, and this is now the lens I use most frequently.
Pros: Quick, accurate auto-focus, good contrast, good colour, nice bokeh.
Conclusion: Overall a very good lens--my first L lens, which I have now owned for approximately than five years. I chose this lens because of its focal length range, maximum aperture, and focal length. I also like the fact that it uses a 77mm threaded filter.
Pros: Overall very sharp, great color rendition, & super fast--everything you would expect from a L-lens.
Cons: Corners are a little soft when used wide open (f/2.8), especially on extra large sensors (5D Mark II--but not so bad on 5D Mark I).
Conclusion: I bought this lens used, and deliberately over the mkII version for the 77mm filter size. I already had the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 70-200mm f/2.8, so I liked the idea of having all of the lens be able to share the same Cokin mount.
Conclusion: What an amazing lens! I own several L lenses, including the 24-70L, 135L, 70-200L. However, this lens is becoming my favourite very quickly for the the following reasons: - the 24-70 is too heavy for a walk-around lens, - the 135L is too narrow and good for portraits mostly, - the 70-200L also too...
Pros: Very sharp at f2.8, Very nice tones and contrats
Conclusion: I bought this lens about 3 months ago. To do so, I swapped some lenses around, including a 17-40. The 16-35 has been great. Very pleased. But at the same time, I just reviewed a number of my best shots from the 16-35 and the previous 17-40. Honestly, I can hardly tell any difference.
Conclusion: A zoom that I had more than 10 years. Despite its weakness in unsharp corners and poor flare performance, the zoom provides convinience and reliability when it comes to travel photography. My image gallery of 16-35/2.8 http://www.roentarre.com/Gallery.aspx?