about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
140 334697 Oct 4, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,265.28
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.64
7.80
8.9
ef_16-35_28_1_

Specifications:
To meet the growing demand of digital SLR owners, this ultra-wide-angle zoom offers a broader view, fast aperture, and closer focusing down to 11 in. (.28m). The first EF wide-angle zoom to combine three aspherical elements and Canonís UD glass, the lens remains compact while providing superior image quality across its range. Constructed to pro standards, itís also highly resistant to dust and moisture.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 
       †††
traveler
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3372
Review Date: May 28, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,325.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Surprisingly sharp lens for it's focal range, Color and contrast befitting a L lens, instant focus lock in all but horrible light, nice tight precision build.
Cons:
plenty of barrel distortion at 16mm

With all the whining I've seen on various forums about this lens, all I can say it it remains the KING of the wide angle zooms in the performance department. It may not be perfect (with more barrel distortion than I like) at 16mm, but it is still a remarkable performer with it's degree of flexibility. Others have also complained about it's "wide open" performance, when in fact the typical use of such a lens will be for outdoor/landscape work, and should be used between F4-F16 at least anyway. When properly used it is one darn sharp lens across from one side to the other. Some have complained of inconsistencies in QC of this lens, and this may well be. While I always recommend one buy from a vendor that allows easy return for replacement, I still feel when one receives a working copy, it will be the best in it's class to be sure.

May 28, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add traveler to your Buddy List  
braindeadmac
Online
Image Upload: On



Registered: Apr 29, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1965
Review Date: May 1, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,299.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Nice focal length range, better image quality than Canon 17-35 it replaces. Nice weight and handling.
Cons:
Still a bit soft in the corners, wide open and as high as f 5.6. Also flares a bit easily

This is a nice lens; I switched to this lens when switching from Nikon. Although reasonably sharp, it is no match for the Nikkor 17-35 AFS in terms of performance wide open. There is no vignetting and light fall off at 16mm is very well controlled. I did get to compare it to a 17-35 Canon and found it a marked improvement over that lens. The lens is a bit prone to flare, but that's probably consistent with it's short focal length.

May 1, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add braindeadmac to your Buddy List  
oldsouth
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 5, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 174
Review Date: Apr 3, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Quality construction.
Cons:
Not as sharp as I was expecting.

Lens had excellent FOV. Was my first wide angle. But I was disappointed in the sharpness, especially with a flash in program mode. Was sharp at aperture 2.8, and 8-9 range but fuzzy at 4-6.
Sold it and bought the 24-70 --- much better lens.


Apr 3, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add oldsouth to your Buddy List  
marksct
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 245
Review Date: Apr 2, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, fast AF, excellent range.
Cons:

This is a Great lens. It is so great I bought a second 10D just for it. Now I carry 2 cams in the bag one specifically for this lens.

Excellent for PJ, Street, Parties, Editorial.

Love it.



Apr 2, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add marksct to your Buddy List  
Jack Flesher
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3489
Review Date: Apr 1, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Great range.
Cons:
>read update<

This lens is sharper in the center than the 17-35 it replaced, but softer in the corners -- at least with my copies of each. So, I would recommend this lens IF you shoot a camera with a 1.6x crop factor, but won't recommend it if you shoot 1.3x or full-frame. This lens also shows more of its other bad characteristics with the fuller frame cameras -- namely some slight CA and barrel distortion.

Update: I recently purchased a second one of these simply for the convenience. This one is significantly superior to my first one. There is obviously sample-to-sample variation with these lenses and that probably explains the variety of responses seen in the several reviews of it here. This copy is quite sharp in the center and remains very good out at the edges -- No, it is not equal to the 35/1.4 L at f2.8, but IMO it is essentially equal to the non-L lenses it replaces and perhaps even sharper in the center than some. I have not compared it directly to the 17-40 -- at least yet Wink I would now rate it a 3.5-4.


Apr 1, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add Jack Flesher to your Buddy List  
Peter Gregg
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 487
Review Date: Mar 31, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent at everything
Cons:
none - well, the price, but you get what you pay for.

This lens excells in every aspect. It is the best lens I own so far and I highly recommend it. Coming from MF cameras, it is the only lens that reminds me of my lenses from my pro MF SLR's, a real pro lens.

Peter Gregg


Mar 31, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Gregg to your Buddy List  
stan_g
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 8, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 232
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast zoom (2.8), VERY fast AF, sharper than 17-35L
Cons:
kinda heavy (21oz)

Noticeably sharper than my all-time favorite D30 lens, the 17-35L, whose lack of sharpness shows up on D60/10D.

Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stan_g to your Buddy List  
deevee
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 12, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 365
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,175.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: well built, sharp
Cons:
heavy

i dont have too much experience with this zoom range asides from the canon 20-35mm f3.5-4.5 and the tokina afx 20-35mm f2.8...needless to say this lens produces better pics than the other 2 but i have the feeling it's not the sharpest in the canon arsenal...i know the 50mm f1.4, the 100mm macro and the 70-200mm f4 are sharper than this zoom...but in this range one don't have 2 many choices except perhaps going w primes only...saying so, it is my primary lens on my d60/and now eos 10d for this range is so useful for both landscapes as well as all around...the build is just solid, i dropped the lens from my backpack i carried to the concrete below and it sustained a minor scratch to the meatl on the base near the mount but still performs flawlessly...it's heavy as it should and is quite hefty for hiking but is built like a tank!...the filter is huge as expected but overall this is a must have lens for digital dlsr, expecially those w the 1.6 x ...if u shoot wide w 10d or d60 then this is a must have lens...at a cost of course ...;-))

Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add deevee to your Buddy List  
sdai
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 3387
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: Best ultra wide Canon makes
Cons:
CA and edge softness

You'll love it forever if you do wide angle, till you use the 17-35 AF-S, which is why I'm still shooting with Nikon

Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add sdai to your Buddy List  
Ben Horne
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 9, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 11637
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,280.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharp, Fast, solid, weather sealing
Cons:
distortion

Unlike the previous 17-35mm f/2.8 L, the new 16-35mm f/2.8 L is rather sharp and Chromatic Abberation is not an issue. CA will still show up from time to time, but you really have to hunt for it. With the 17-35mm, CA was a very big problem. This is the lens in my lineup that continues to impress me the more I use it. For a wide angle zoom, it is VERY sharp. Unlike the 17-35mm, the 16-35mm is usable wide open.

I highly recommend this lens --- the focal length is great on the 1D, and I've even used it on a film body with very sharp results corner to corner.


Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Visit Homepage Add Ben Horne to your Buddy List  
Andy Biggs
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 16, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 1621
Review Date: Mar 30, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp!!!!
Cons:
Cost

If I could have only one lens, this would be it. Period. Wonderfully built, USM really shines, and the sharpness in my images really pay off. This is not an inexpensive lens, but well worth saving up for.

I didn't own the 17-35mm before this one, so I cannot compare the two.


Mar 30, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Andy Biggs to your Buddy List  
John MacLean
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 11, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 390
Review Date: Mar 29, 2003 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,516.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: sharp
Cons:
some CA

I've encountered less CA with this lens than I did with my older 17-35, but it's still there if you look for it.

there is some barrel distortion @ 16mm too.


Mar 29, 2003
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add John MacLean to your Buddy List  

†††



Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
140 334697 Oct 4, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,265.28
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.64
7.80
8.9
ef_16-35_28_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9