| Review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Worth every penny..., Monday, 15 March 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I have been making images with some sort of camera since the early 1960's. In the mid-1970's I got my first SLR. It was some time before I was able to afford a wide angle lens, but when I got one, it opened up a whole world of imaging that was previously unknown to me.

This lens has been reviewed by many people and has been criticized as well as lauded for it's properties of build quality, brightness, sharpness, and the quality of color it transmits to the sensor (or film).

My concern about sharpness in the corners was based on some critical reviews. But like so many reviews of so many lenses over the years, they're not telling the whole story. Simply put, in practical application of this lens, it is incredibly sharp and produces incredible images. It's a very handy package, though the lens hood is challenging to get into a pocket when you just want to carry the lens in the pouch and walk around with little but a camera and a lens or two.

I have no regrets about purchasing this lens. It's everything I hoped it would be. I had considered buying the 17-40mm because of the savings and because of the same-size filter (77mm) to other lenses in the line. I imagine paying twice as much for this lens and then piling the filter on top of of that is going to put some people off. I am glad I waited and raised the money - the extra speed of the lens and extra angle of view at 16mm was well worth an extra week of selling film cameras and old lenses on that popular auction site...

If you're trying to decide to buy this lens, I will not give you any information that will discourage you - in terms of technical quality this lens is unbeatable. If you don't need the speed, or don't expect to use the lens much, the savings on the 17-40 might be worth it. For me, I'm guessing this lens is going to be on my camera a bunch!

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Excellent lens for CINEMA as well as stills, makes, Tuesday, 09 March 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

Allow me to fill in a little niche gap here. Obviously this is a great lens for still photographers, but for all of the DSLR filmmakers out there who are having trouble with lackluster and muddy video results, the problem lies not with your camera; you need to step up to the L-Series glass. The primary issue with the 7D, 5D Mark II, etc. is the chunky artifacting and pixellation that comes from the poor compression codec built into the processor, or so we all thought. However, the key is, primarily, the quality of the glass in front of the sensor. This lens seems to nullify nearly ALL of the drawbacks of the HD video processing in my 7D. I can expand frame grabs up to 4k resolution, and they still hold up! 2K and 3K looks fantastic. THE GLASS MAKES THE DIFFERENCE. It's borderline magical.
This lens is nice and fat, just like a cinema lens, and therein lies much of its power. The bigger glass allows more light to enter into the sensor, giving the camera more "information" to pack into the frame, whereas with cheap, small lenses, the sensor has to essentially blow up and extract a muddy image from a tiny window. Drop the contrast, sharpness, and saturation settings to zero, add some L-Series glass, and your DSLR video can compete with Genesis, Viper, and can even hold its own against Red, at 1/10th of the cost.
This lens is perfect for the 7D's APS-C sensor. With the 5D, vignetting is a bit of an issue wide open. The focal range is perfect for walk-around footage, steadicam shots, and wide-angle effects shots. Consider this an essential range.

If you want professional-quality video, you need to have L-Lenses. I no longer care about the cost...I am immediately replacing my lens lineup with L-Series glass. I can't believe I've run a photo/video business for 6 years without L lenses! Besides, compared to other lens manufacturers, L-Series lenses are actually quite cheap. I've had the benefit of comparing this with Panavision lenses and I can assure you, there's no significant difference in the results. NONE. This is a gold mine for independent filmmakers.
Shell out the cash. AND be sure to add a few hundred more to the cost of this lens, in the form of high-quality filters! Protect your glass! And do it properly...there is no point in spending $1k+ on a lens if you're going to ruin it and put a piece of plexi-glass in front of it...just because you want to save $50. Get a $100 multi-coated (MRC) UV filter from B+W and just think of it as an insurance policy on your lens. Put on the filter the moment you take out your lens and never take it off.

Happy shooting! You will love this baby.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

pretty good lens, Wednesday, 17 February 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.0
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		3.0
Value for Money		4.0

this lens is great if you like having the wide angle look.

i use it on a full frame 5D.

the sharpness quality of this lens is nowhere near as good as prime lens and is the most noticeable bad aspect of this lens as you can easily tell on some images that the sharpness is not too good.

the distortion can also be very noticeable and requires some skill in the angle and distance of the subject you are trying to shoot if you want to avoid the distortion. if you are too close, the distortion can be very ugly and drastic.

it is definitely not ideal for a walkaround lens and the 24-70 would be better for full frame while the 17-55 would be a much better alternative.

but if want a wide angle zoom lens, then this would be it.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Incredible lens!, Sunday, 14 February 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I purchased this lens when I upgraded from my 40D crop body to the 5Dmk2. I decided to spend the extra over the 17-40 and get this lens, simply for the additional F-stop. The quality of this lens is just incredible. I was using the 17-55 lens before this, and I thought that was good. I put this puppy on my 40D to compare and was blown away by the quality. On the 5Dmk2, it just shines. I can't say enough about this lens. Built well, I have no issues with dust, and pictures always turn out stunning.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Great lens!, Sunday, 31 January 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.3
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		4.0
Value for Money		5.0

I was originally looking to get a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, for the focal length and glass speed. Taking into consideration that my 40D has a FOVCF of 1.6, I opted to get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8 -- the equivalent focal length is close enough to what I was looking for. I don't regret making that decision at all. This is an awesome lens.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Wow!!! Great lens for the 5dMark 2!!, Thursday, 07 January 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

Great Lens Period, you would have to hold one and use it. Not too heavy and a good size. Very clear and great for videos.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Couldn't take it off my camera for days... I love , Wednesday, 06 January 2010


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I've wanted a wide angle lens for a long time, and let me tell you this was worth the wait. While it is pricy, I don't regret paying what I did for it. It's just an amazing piece of glass. It comes with a nice pouch to protect it will pull strings at the top and can work well as a walk around lens.

I use it on a Canon 5DMII and I've even done some great video shooting with it. When it's wide, it's very wide. I have not noticed the same softness that others are talking about.

I've added a few photos that I shot with this to this page.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

The ulta wide to own, Monday, 07 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		4.0
Value for Money		5.0

I use this lens on a 5D Mk II and I have had none of the clarity issues that some reviewers have complained about beyond 20mm. Excellent image quality in all ranges and I enjoy the flexibility that a ultra wide prime lens doesn't.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Have something less than a 5D? Get this lens..., Sunday, 06 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

For those of us with cameras that don't have a full frame sensor (this translates roughly to anyone who has "less" than a 5D in quality), this lens is a must. Why?

-- the zoom range of this lens, combined with the 1.6 cropping factor on (many) cameras, means that the actual working range of the lens is pretty close to human perspective. That is, it looks like things look using your eyes :-)

-- this particular lens is very fast at f/2.8, so low light situations are less painful.

-- odd comment: the lens is a nice size for daily carrying. Nicely balances the camera, plenty of area to grip, but not too much that sticks out. Comfortable... which means you'll turn to it more.

Lastly, I'm an advocate for engaging your subject whenever you can (though that's not always possible :-) With this as your daily carry lens, you'll be forced to walk right up to the people and things you're shooting. It forces you to engage, but still give you an opportunity to frame the shot with a lot of flexibility, since the zoom is pretty wide.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Great Wide angle Lens for Landscape or Low light S, Wednesday, 02 December 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.0
Sharpness		3.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		4.0

The only reason that I given this lens a 4 star rating is because canon changed the diameter of the front of the lens to 82mm, which for most of us is a real pain. Because, for one thing, if you are buying this L class lens then you most likely already have the other great zoom lenses by canon which are the EF24-70mm f2.8L and the EF70-200mm f2.8L which are both 77mm dia lenses. Now you have to buy all new filter for this one lens and they are not readily avaible of cheap like most of the filters for the 77mm size. Besides that, the lens works well. Typical sharp L class optics and great construction. It is also a nice and light small lens (except for the filter size). I would definily recommend this lens but warn that you better be ready to spend some serious money on filters, which most people will have to do seeing this is primarily used for landscape photography doe to the wide angle.
Thanks

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

What's in the box from Amazon!, Wednesday, 14 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.8
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		4.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

Ok, here it is fast and dirty and I wish other people would explain whats in the box!
First, the lens! 16-35mm of pure luxury mojo! Its big and beautiful all the girls will Envy you! I'm talking big! 82mm!
Second, the standard rear lens cap.
Third, a very nice leathery pouch with draw strings. The bottom is rounded and has a thicker leather part to better to protect your beast!
Fourth, a lens cap that can choke a horse and yes its my first expensive lens so of course its lot bigger than my starter lens. That is only 58mm a huge difference!
and last the Canon EW-88 Hood.

It has a USA warranty card and with Amazon Prime shipping you'll get it nextday for sure for just 3.99. Its like 80 bucks a year to be a member and I piss that away just breathing lol.
Anything order from Amazon as the seller is pretty much guaranteed overnight if you order it that way. All others beware of 1-5 day processing times even if you order it nextday it will take days! I learned my lesson hopefully you too!

I was not sure how this was going to turn out but I'm really happy with it!

PIC EXAMPLE. If your sitting at your computer right now and you take a picture of your computer screen from about 8 inches away, you'll get the whole screen! Thats how wide of an angle it is! and I got a 24" computer screen how crazy is that from 8 inches?
Now try this with your camera at home using a starter lens like the Canon EF 28-105mm 1:4-5.6 USM and see what happens, not even close!

So again buying this here was the best price and its the same apples to apples if you where buying somewhere else! So now you know

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

I LOVE THIS LENS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, Sunday, 11 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		4.5
Sharpness		4.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		4.0

OMG, this is like, seks. I love this lens. The AF in these L series are so amazing fast! The f/2.8 is great for indoor group shots or scenery. MK2 version has no compression on the edges. If there are, it isnt noticable.

The Filters are very expensive for this lens, but if you make the jump to pick up the lens, youd drop any penny on protecting the glass on this baby.

I've owned this lens a little over 6 months, and it has treated me very well, never failed me, and i would truely recommend this lens to any photographer looking into Wide angle lens.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Phenomenal WA zoom - best on the planet!, Saturday, 03 October 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

From the moment I mounted this lens on my 5D it was true love. Build quality was as one would expect for an L-series lens. IQ that is stunning. Sharp as a tack on the 5D and now the 1DmkIII. It is very wide on FF, not so much on the 1.3x crop, but perhaps more useful now overall. This is certainly a lens that I will keep on permanent standby in my collection. That's high praise since the only other lens that I can say that about is the 135 f/2. Now there is a combination that I could live with in a 2 lens arrangement. Very highly recommended.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Does exactly what its supposed to...a great UWA Zo, Wednesday, 30 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

I've read some pretty critical reviews of this lens; from my perspective some of these could be due to an occasional bad copy, but others are likely due to the owner expecting way too much from a UWA zoom lens. Most complaints center on lack of corner sharpness and/or light fall off/vignetting at the wide end and wide apertures. I've owned and extensively tested 4 high end UWA Zooms to date now; the Canon 16-35 f2.8 L II, the 17-40 f4 L, the EF-s 10-22, and the Nikon 14-24 2.8 ED (the accepted gold standard for UWA Zooms), and can tell you that the Nikon is the only one that can reasonably (but not perfectly) hold the corners at the extreme wide ends of FL and aperture. Not surprisingly however the Nikon is yet another $400-$500 more expensive than the 16-35II (even more when you factor in the adapter to shoot on a Canon). In real world shooting at f/8 to f/16 however, I can confidently state that you are not going to see any meaningful difference between the 4 lenses without resorting to some serious pixel peeping gymnastics, and even then I'll gladly take bets that most couldn't tell the unlabeled photos apart. So confident in fact that I finally traded in my revered Nikon for an excellent copy of the 16-35II.

Yes, this lens exhibits some corner softness and light fall off at the wide end and/or at f2.8, however this starts to clear up nicely even as low as f/4 and is gone by f/8. By comparison, if you really want an eye opener, look at the vignetting on the 17-40 wide open (f/4) - two thirds of the image is dark with only a small central spot unaffected (incidentally, those that post that the 17-40 suffers no corner vignetting are probably shooting JPEG and not examining the RAW image). Contrast this to the 16-35 wide open at f/2.8 where only the extreme edges and corners are dark. Same with corner softness, it does exist at f/2.8 but clears up nicely by f/8. In all cases, if you shoot this lens at the same settings as the 17-40, it outperforms its smaller cousin in all aspects (and the 17-40 an excellent lens in its own right). The 16-35 is more than just a 17-40 that goes to f/2.8, it is a significant improvement at all apertures and focal lengths.

I did some extensive testing with filters and found, contrary to claims in other reviews, no detectible difference in vignetting between a slim or regular UV filter at the 16mm wide end. Maybe there is a slight difference that some purists can see, but for the life of me I can't tell the difference, so I use a regular thickness filter for the convenience of being able to use the normal dust cap. The 82mm filter size is also often cited as a point of criticism. Yes, 82mm filters are larger and more expensive, but that's the price you pay for a lens with these specifications. At least this lens will accept filters, try that with the Nikon. Finally, I've also heard criticism that this lens starts to go soft above 24mm, but I personally haven't seen any evidence of this either. Maybe those are bad copy issues again? But mine is perfectly sharp (stunningly sharp in the center) throughout the entire range.

In short, if you absolutely must have a UWA Zoom that has razor sharp corners at f/2.8, you're going to need to go to other extreme measures such as the Nikon 14-24 or maybe a Zeiss, but then you've got all of the manual focus/exposure issues to deal with. In most real world applications at f/8 to f/16, this lens easily holds it's own against the Nikon 14-24 and definitely edges out the 17-40. In my experience, if I am shooting at f/2.8, I'm likely trying to blur the background anyway, so why would I care if the corners are soft? And if shooting in low light I can't notice the vignetting in the corners either. In any case, it's easily corrected in DPP anyway.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, Sunday, 27 September 2009


Overall rating (weighted)		5.0
Sharpness		5.0
Build Quality		5.0
AF Speed		5.0
Value for Money		5.0

a very sturdy lens. pictures came out EXTREMELY clean. if you have ever used the mark 1 16-35mm, you'll notice a world of different. with the previous version, lens flare was so abundant that i had to sell it after only using it for 3 days. this mark II version is much more crisp and clear. hardly ANY lens flare. also, i notice that some people are complaining about how it is less sharp when zooming out. closing your aperture a tiny bit will fix this. anywhere between f/5.6 and f/11, you should experience VERY good images. also, when you buy this lens you should incorporate a SLIM UV filter. preferably the pro1 series from hoya or any SLIM UV filter from B+W. if you dont use the slim filter, then you will most definitely experience vignetting when using a regular filter, because the lens is so wide.
this lens is very solid and i see no problems with it. it they could incorporate the IS system, that would be amazing, but also very costly. other than that, i have no cons.

Was this review helpful to you? yes

Report this review