Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens
  
 
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


Jeff Donald wrote:
While IS may not work for you, it does work for some of us. I routinely shoot the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II at night, at 200mm and at 1/15 of a second. I can see myself shooting the 16-35mm f/4 at or a second, something I couldn't do with the f/2.8 version.


I most often shoot from the tripod, but IS has saved my bacon more than once and produced photographs that I licensed.

Dan

BTW: I ordered a copy of this new lens and I'll share my impressions once I have a chance to use it a bit.



Jul 01, 2014 at 05:09 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


OntheRez wrote:
I would appreciate a thoughtful discussion of just how valuable IS really is. On my 400mm f/5.6L I could really see how it might help though the increase in price would drive it beyond many shooter's budget. At 16mm? Would love to hear from folks using it in the field. Does IS really make it equal to the f/2.8 version in low light?


First, thanks for the rest of your thoughtful post the portions I did not quote here.

Let me offer a few thoughts about the IS question based on experience with other lenses.

(I have a copy of the 16-35 f/4L IS coming, so I'll have real world experience with that before long, too. I'm curious to find out just how much IS can do at 16mm. In theory, if I believe that I can effectively hand hold at 1/16 second at 16mm, we could imagine that it should be possible to handhold at .5 or 1 second with 3-4 stop IS! That is hard to believe, but we'll see.)

The IS versus aperture question is tricky and fraught with subjective value judgments, even though the underlying technical facts are fairly straightforward. When it comes to low light, an extra stop of aperture gets you one more stop of shutter speed for dealing with both moving subjects and camera motion. IS gets you nothing when it comes to your moving subject, but it can get you 2-4 stops of lower light handheld shooting when camera stability is the issue.

The advantages with long lenses are obvious, since we so often find ourselves running out of ISO or aperture when shooting handheld in low light, and when the shutter speed limitation is not so much subject motion as our own ability to hold the lens steadily.

Things are less clear with wide angle lenses, where we can sufficiently stop subject motion (if that is what we need to do) with lower shutter speeds, and we don't find ourselves caught in the ISO/aperture/shutter speed matrix quite so quickly.

However, it seems to me that when shooting handheld with any focal length there are times when we might want to use a smaller aperture (to not sacrifice large DOF for exposure) and/or shoot a relatively static subject in very low light. The widest lens I have with IS goes to 24mm, and I have found IS to be useful when shooting at that focal length.

The f/2.8 aperture can get you a slightly narrower DOF, though I suspect that this will not be very noticeable at the largest shortest focal lengths. (It would be interesting to see a comparison of 16mm at f/2.8 and f/4 that shows this clearly.)

I don't think there is a clearcut one-size-fits-all answer to the question, and I can see certain circumstances in which the f/2.8 aperture might be critical and others where the IS might be just the thing.

Dan




Edited on Jul 02, 2014 at 02:43 PM · View previous versions



Jul 01, 2014 at 05:38 PM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


I was a late-adopter to IS, I didn't regard it as necessary with anything but long lenses but now I'm of the opinion it's useful in any lens.


Jul 01, 2014 at 05:41 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


one curiosity is that TDP shows the 16-35 f/4 worse mid-frame f/5.6 than f/4, but same to better there at f/8, so it can't be diffraction




Jul 01, 2014 at 05:55 PM
newphoto
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


mfpm wrote:
If you check the other thread in this forum that has a link to a review, maybe you will change your mind. And I'm not talking about IS

It's not a minor improvement in sharpness in the corners. It's a major! (and not only in the corners)


I read the review and the 16-35 F4 IS does seem to have sharper corners than the 16-35 F2.8 II. I wonder if the difference can be attributed to the IS in the newer lens, even though the two lenses were allegedly mounted on tripods? Never mind the reason why, the newer lens does seem to have significantly better resolution in the corners.. If I stay with Canon full frame I will have to consider this lens in the future.



Jul 02, 2014 at 12:12 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



pipspeak
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


newphoto wrote:
I read the review and the 16-35 F4 IS does seem to have sharper corners than the 16-35 F2.8 II. I wonder if the difference can be attributed to the IS in the newer lens, even though the two lenses were allegedly mounted on tripods? Never mind the reason why, the newer lens does seem to have significantly better resolution in the corners.. If I stay with Canon full frame I will have to consider this lens in the future.


If it was on a tripod then the IS was probably turned off anyway (as is recommended). Corner sharpness is pretty darn good with the new lens judging from this review, much better than the f/2.8. Some people need an f/2.8 lens for photojournalism-type stuff, but for landscape and travel photography the f/4 seems like a no-brainer.




Jul 02, 2014 at 01:51 AM
cameron12x
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


My copy is supposed to arrive tomorrow. Can't wait.

I have the 16-35mm f/2.8 II and will be comparing the two lenses to decide which one to keep.



Jul 02, 2014 at 02:36 AM
Alex Nail
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


Just a bit of feedback on the IS.....I was regularly able to capture images at 1/2 second at 16mm when I tested last night (about 70% success). I also had some 1 out of 4 images sharp at 1 second!

These were of a level that I would find acceptable for anything but landscape prints, in other words, they were sharp but not perfectly so (the kind of sharpness I would usually get from 1/15th without IS). I make that 3 stop IS. This is exaclty in line with what The Digital Picture report.

I'm actually really surprised at this (I was hoping for 2 stops realistically). That makes the 16-35 f/4L IS a fantastic lens for handheld shooting whilst hiking even under dark skies or at twilight (with an ISO boost).

Alex



Jul 02, 2014 at 09:48 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


Alex Nail wrote:
Just a bit of feedback on the IS.....I was regularly able to capture images at 1/2 second at 16mm when I tested last night (about 70% success). I also had some 1 out of 4 images sharp at 1 second!

These were of a level that I would find acceptable for anything but landscape prints, in other words, they were sharp but not perfectly so (the kind of sharpness I would usually get from 1/15th without IS). I make that 3 stop IS. This is exaclty in line with what The Digital Picture report.

I'm actually really surprised at this
...Show more

For whatever reason I just can't get the IS to give me that many stops. It seems like when I manage to hold still enough for IS to work well, I hold still enough for without IS to also work pretty well. I'm just struggling to get more than 2/3rds to 1 stop at 16mm. I was hoping for two, but seem to get one, still better than nothing though.



Jul 02, 2014 at 05:41 PM
KiboOst
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · TDP Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM Lens


http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_ef_16_35mm_f4_l_is_usm_review/

Not ever read, will do !



Jul 02, 2014 at 06:20 PM
1       2      
3
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password