Upload & Sell: On
Have you guys dug into the build/adjustment of the 16-35 f/4 IS? Is it still a pain for lab techs to adjust for centering/tilt and everything, or has it been improved? I know the 17-40 and 16-35 were difficult, no? The Canon CPS guy explained that it was very difficult for them to correct for decentering and stuff with the 17-40/16-35.
What a great question!!!
We finally got the post up for MTF testing, so we spent yesterday taking one apart and I'm doing the write up right now. Should be done this afternoon.
I can't say for certain that it will be better, but it looks like it should be. The 16-35 had 6 different adjustment locations with 3 adjustments (of infinite degree) at each location, plus certain ones affected others. So you'd get it almost right, find you had to just tweak this corner at 16mm, make that adjustment and find all the others were now off, so you started over.
The adjustment layout in this looks much more straightforward and logical. Three (instead of 6) tilting collars at the rear element. Three each in the first and second groups. The f/2.8 has 6 in the rear, 3 tilts and a rotation in the front, another set of 3 that tilted the extending barrel, and a final set that affected the zoom element.
I almost hate to mention it, because I so believe that 'weather sealing' is generally marketing BS, but there is very robust sealing in the f/4 IS, too.