about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
16 13918 Dec 19, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
100% of reviewers $1,203.11
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.88
9.06
9.9
Screen_Shot_2014-07-21_at_8_05_15_PM_copy

Specifications:
Focal Length: 16-35mm
APS Equivalent: 26-56mm
Max Aperture: f/4
Min Aperture: f/22
Diaphragm Blades: 9 (circular)
Lens Construction: 16 elements in 12 groups, including 3 aspherical and 2 UD elements, fluorine coating
Diagonal Angle of View
(Based on image circle): 108.2 to 63 degrees
Focus Details: Inner focusing; full-time manual focus and USM
Front Element Rotation: No
Zoom System: Rotary
Closest Focus: 0.28m / 0.92 ft.
Magnification Ratio: 0.23x / 1:4.3 (at 35mm)
Filter Size 77mm
Dimensions
(Length x Diameter): 112.8mm x 82.6mm / 4.44 in. x 3.25 in.
Weight: 615g / 1.36 lb
Notes: Image Stabilization (up to four stop correction); Dust and moisture resistant; Includes lens hood, soft pouch.


 


          
Fred Meebley
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Dec 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 286
Review Date: Dec 19, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Optics, Image Stabilization, Fast accurate autofocus, Solid build, Nice lens cap haha
Cons:
Haven't found any yet.

The optics are great, I love the sharpness and contrast right into the corners if I did my part. The colors are good and fringing is well controlled. The flare is also well controlled and sun stars have great definition and shape. The image stabilization is useful and effective. I also like the vignette, it can help give some images a natural looking pop, but can be eliminated with a mouse click if I don't want it. I keep this lens on my 5d3 90% of the time lately and haven't found any reason to complain yet.

Dec 19, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Fred Meebley to your Buddy List  
dhphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 15, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10112
Review Date: Dec 1, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, good contrast, well made, weatherproofed
Cons:
Poor quality control (the first lens I tried was very soft). Not quite the world-beater I was expecting but good nonetheless

As the owner and longtime user of the 17-40L I was intrigued by this lens - would it 'blow away' the 17-40L ?

The answer is yes and no.

Stopped down there is very little difference in IQ, the 16-35mm IS wins very slightly in the corners but in the centre the two lenses are more or less identical in performance. You wouldn't tell the difference in a print made at f11 in my opinion.

At the wider apertures and wide open yes the 16-35 is noticeably better, especially in the corners and the image stabilisation is very good indeed, so if this is important to you then this is the lens to buy.

If you will nearly always be stopped down the difference is really not as great as you'd (or I'd) expect.


Dec 1, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add dhphoto to your Buddy List  
Ekychoi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 23, 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 23, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,280.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent color and sharpness. It has the look of the 24-70 II. No regrets in selling my 17-40mm.
Cons:
It is a bit bigger than the old 17-40mm. I need to reorganize my bag to fit in this lens.

Love this new lens. Wish Canon had built this lens before. Just go out and get it. Very good product. Even my wife noticed the difference in the picture quality.

Sep 23, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ekychoi to your Buddy List  
Soulphoto2014
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 3, 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 3, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Corner-corner sharpness wide open, first UWA with IS.
Cons:
f4 (f2.8 is always handy)

In past I tested all UWA's, so i'll keep it short.

This is the best (and only) corner-corner sharp Canon.
There aren't much alternatives (forget 16-35's and 17-40's with unsharp corners).

If your budget is limited I recommended only 2 lenses which are equally sharp : Tokina 17 f3.5 AT-X Pro (best option, only Ebay) & Tokina 16-28 f2.8 AT-X Pro.


Sep 3, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Soulphoto2014 to your Buddy List  
davidmarsh
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Oct 26, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 140
Review Date: Aug 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Clarity, sharpness, low light capabilities, colour
Cons:
None

Amazing lens, I sold both my Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8 L lens for two Canon EF 16-35mm F4 IS L lenses and have never looked back. I provide a commercial HDR Photographic service to my clients and you need a lens that has very little distortion as any imperfections are then multiplied by say 5 times when you are using 5 images for HDR.
The link below is from a set of images we did for a new Audi garage in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK. Use the 'full screen' mode by clicking on the 2 headed arrow to the bottom left of the gallery...

http://wallgo.wallgodev.co.uk/articles/17/2014-08-14/the-new-audi-centre-in-hdr/


Aug 29, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add davidmarsh to your Buddy List  
Jim Heine
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Apr 9, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 298
Review Date: Aug 27, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp enough across the frame at all focal lengths, minimal flare (even if you try), minimal CA, fairly light weight, bokeh is decent, a total pleasure to hold and use in every way, focuses FAST
Cons:
in an ideal world it would be sharper, has distortion/vignetting at 16mm, IS doesn't work 4 stops when you get the shutter speeds low (I can't shoot much slower than 1/8 second consistently with IS at any focal length).

This is by far Canon's best wide angle zoom lens. They nailed this one. It's the first zoom that's sharp (enough) across the frame at all focal lengths, even wide open.

I use this lens a lot for dancing shots at wedding receptions. The focus speed beats out any lens I've every tried, including my previous low light champion, the 24L II.

I really can't find much fault. It's nearly perfect if you only need f4.


Aug 27, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Jim Heine to your Buddy List  
John Daniel
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1348
Review Date: Aug 7, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharpness center to corner, image quality, color, Stabilization, great for landscape shooting trip.
Cons:
None so far

I have had the 17-40mm, the 16-35mm, 16-35mm f/2.8 II and then this one. When I saw the MTF charts, I made a leap of faith and sold my 16-35mm f/2.8 II. AND i do not regret it.

The new 16-35mm f/4L IS is sharper in the corner and even when used on the 36 mpixels A7R, it produces sharp images. It has IS which is great when, for example, you are on a trip to Europe, in an old town with narrow streets requiring a very wide lens and you do not want to use a tripod, or in other places where you are not allowed to use a tripod like some churches or museums.

I would say this one is as sharp in the center (or almost as sharp at some focales) as the 16-35mm f/2.8L II. But in the corners, it's the new king.

Matched to the new 24-70mm f/4L IS and the 70-200mm f/4L IS, you've got a new light Trilogy for the landscape travellers.


Aug 7, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add John Daniel to your Buddy List  
MurrayMac
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 31, 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 31, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very well built; extremely sharp; great weight; good focal range; very useful image stabilization; 77mm filter size
Cons:
none

I just came off a two week trip to northern Europe and this lens performed better than anticipated. Even though I brought my 24-105, the new 16-35 f/4L IS never came off my 6D. I traded in my 17-40 and will never regret the extra cost.

- flare was extremely well controlled
- the IS was very beneficial in 'low light' indoor situations
- CA is well controlled
- the lens is sharp in all focal lengths, from corner to corner [35mm was suggested as it weakest point, but I fail to see it]
- there is a noticeable improvement in distortion, over the 17-40 model


Feel free to view my "real world" shots at my Flickr site. All photos with this lens are clearly marked below the photo.....

https://www.flickr.com/photos/the-spirit-within/

I highly suspect this will be my walk around lens from this point forward.


Jul 31, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add MurrayMac to your Buddy List  
datfish
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 1, 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 80
Review Date: Jul 29, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Lightweight, Sharp throughout, Great Range and IS a bonus
Cons:
None so far other than price.

After finally shelling out for a 5D3 in late 2012, my 7D got pushed to "Tele use only"...... almost. I contemplated replacing my EF-S 10-22mm with a 16-35mm but the price of the EF 16-35mm F2.8 L USM (i & ii) and some of the "mediocre"reviews ( relative to price) made me hang back.

Recently I splashed out and sold my EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM and the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 and funded the 16-35mm F/4 IS USM after reading some of the stellar reviews it was receiving......AND SO GLAD I DID!
It has been fantastic so far!!!!! Not too heavy, great focal range and exceptional corner to corner sharpness throughout the F range for a lens of this type.

Don't get me wrong the EF-S lenses I sold had been FANTASTIC for many years on the 7d, but now??.... I am on another planet with the 16-35 and 24-70 matched to a 5d3.........SERIOUSLY!

Now I have my own Zoom Holy Trinity of sorts, adding the 16-34 F4 to my EF 24-70 F/2.8 USM ii and an 70-200 F2.8 IS USM ii, that I have had for a couple of years.
I have not used the 16-35mm F2.8 USM i or ii so I cannot compare, but from what I have seen so far , this lens is close to the sharpness and overall IQ of the 24-70 F2.8 USM ii in my view.

If anyone is interested , and early days yet, but I have done some testing on drop in ND filters with the 16-35 F/4 on a 5d3. Results tell me that with a Hoya HD CPL thin mount AND with a Cokin Z Pro with only one or two slots fitted to the holder, the 16-35 F4 does NOT suffer from added vignetting at 16mm. Adding the third slot causes significant vignetting.

If you're looking to add the 16-35mm range to you're FF kit you should SERIOUSLY LOOK AT THE F/4 Variant, particularly if , like me, f2.8 is not that important to you in the shorter end of the focal range it covers.


Jul 29, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add datfish to your Buddy List  
grueber34
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 10, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 11
Review Date: Jul 24, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Gorgeous
Cons:
A little large

Wow. If you can swing it, just get this thing and never look back.

Jul 24, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add grueber34 to your Buddy List  
hagejsh
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 23, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 19, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent IQ. I mean at all focal lengths. For this 16-35 range it is the first time Cannon has not let me down. Lighter than the predecessors.
Cons:
None really. It is quite a bit less expensive than the 16-35 F 2.8 11 and a much better performer.

Excellent IQ. I was very very disappointed with the 16-35 F 2.8. I was more than disappointed with the 16-35 F 2.8 11. Both were very soft at almost all distances. After reading some reviews I traded in the latter for this version. I am not disappointed. It may not have the waterproofing of the previous issues, but they were not worth carrying in my bag. I am using it on a 5D Mk !!!. Heaven! With the 5d Mk 3 the ISO adjustment more than makes up for this being an F4. I do not shoot high speed sports events.
However--if I did--I would not use either of the predecessors due to lack of IQ. I now feel quite complete with this lens, the 24-70 F 2.8 Mk 2 and the 70-200 F 2.8 Mk 2. I feel these lenses to be on par. Good job Cannon.


Jul 19, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hagejsh to your Buddy List  
Peter Kotsa
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 1, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 267
Review Date: Jul 18, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: 77mm filter, 9 blade aperture, IS
Cons:
none so far

Great results at all focal lengths. Shooting f4 and getting sharp corners is a luxury for a super wide zoom in Canon and requires some getting used to. A very comparable lens to the 17mm TSE. The 16-35mmf4L IS has slightly better coatings than the TSE.
Excellent quality and build. Some might find it a little bit pricey, but I think it is in a completely different league than the 17-40, so cannot compare the two. Like I said, its closer to the 17 TSE in image quality.


Jul 18, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Peter Kotsa to your Buddy List  
jrobichaud
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 391
Review Date: Jul 16, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Corner sharpness and overall IQ, 77mm filters, great IS
Cons:
Not a one

I've been waiting a long time for this lens! Have shot and owned the 17-40mm, 16-35mm (both versions) Tamron 16-28mm 2.8, Zeiss 18mm and 21mm. All of them let me down with edge IQ, especially with large groups of people. I just had to make it work with the 24-70mm 2.8 II (which is amazing).
I've had the new 16-35mm f4L IS about 3 weeks, a gazillion images with her on the 5D III and am very impressed with her.
Everything else is up for sale. Thanks Canon.


Jul 16, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jrobichaud to your Buddy List  
Peter Kirk
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 25, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 309
Review Date: Jul 4, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Exceptional Image quality, IS, flare control
Cons:
$$ A tad Pricey

Having owned the 20-35L, 17-35L, 17-40L, 16-35L I & II and 17TSE, I have a considerable amount of experience with Canon wides.

Of all the above mentioned lenses, the 16-35 f4L IS closely resembles the 17mm TSE in image quality. It is razor sharp from f4, even the extreme corners are excellent wide open.

I must say i was hesitant in purchasing "another" Canon wide zoom, not expecting too much, but it has outweighed my 16-35 2.8LII, that I had to sell it.

CA control is excellent and I never knew IS would be so beneficial on a wide angle...its so handy in so many ways.

10/10 for this lens...


Jul 4, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Kirk to your Buddy List  
Snupi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 4, 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 9
Review Date: Jun 30, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp. Beautiful rendition, almost 3D-effect. Very flare resistant. Excellent throughout the range. Great value for money.
Cons:
None.

I have owned both the EF 17-40 (two copies) and the EF 16-35/2.8II. The 16-35/4IS is in another league, especially in the 16/17-20mm range.
My copy has almost no chromatic aberrations, and no trace of jaggies and such behavior. As sharp as the EF 24-70/2.8II, but much better regarding field curvature, which the 24-70 suffers a lot from.
Wery reistant against flare, the best lens I have owned in that regard.
This is a lens in the upper league, also considering being an L-lens. Recommended!


Jun 30, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Snupi to your Buddy List  
ThomasGermany
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 28, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 2
Review Date: Jun 26, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, even on the edge and wide open. Good to handle. I am more than happy with this lens
Cons:
Cant find any

I already got mine and tested it. I am very satisfied, Image quality is definitely L-Level! The Pictures are sharp, and i dont see any Problems, even on the edge and wide open. This lens is definitely better than the 17-40L.
Build Quality ist like other L`s very good.
In the meantime I got the chance to use it in the arctic. Perfect Picture quility with the 5mk3. I would buy it again any time....


Jun 26, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ThomasGermany to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
16 13918 Dec 19, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
100% of reviewers $1,203.11
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.88
9.06
9.9
Screen_Shot_2014-07-21_at_8_05_15_PM_copy