about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
126 358697 Apr 18, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,493.19
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.73
7.97
9.1
16-35II

Specifications:
The EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is a high performance, water-resistant, and ultra wide-angle Canon L-series lens. It has been specifically designed for improved edge-to-edge image quality that will meet the strict requirements of professional and high-end amateur photographers. It features 3 high-precision aspherical lens elements, each of a different type: ground, replica and GMo for even better image quality than the original EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM. The circular aperture produces a beautiful and natural background blur when shooting at wider apertures. Other features include internal focusing, a ring type USM (Ultra Sonic Monitor), and new AF algorithms for fast and quiet autofocusing.

Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 16-35mm f/2.8

Lens Construction: 16 elements in 12 groups

Diagonal Angle of View: 10810'-63

Focus Adjustment: AF with full-time manual

Closest Focusing Distance: 0.92 ft./0.28m

Filter Size: 82mm, P=0.75mm/1 filter

Max. Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.5 in. x 4.4 in./ 88.5mm x 111.6mm


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8  next
      
jamato8
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2336
Review Date: Aug 27, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,520.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, superb contrast, color saturation, resolution and good feel.
Cons:
None at this time, well filter cost but like the lens that is a one time purchase, I hope.

Having used the 17-35L for a number of years I always desired just a little more sharpness, contrast and saturation. Something I mention in the positives of the 16-35II. In many applications for my work as a visual anthropologist and natural history photographer the 17-35 was fine for the job and from what I have seen mine appeared to be a sharp copy. I had also seen some of the great wide angle shots by the Nikon lens of this range and I realized more of this quality would be welcome.
Well the 16-35II has come through in spades and I am very happy to have one in my bag now.


Aug 27, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jamato8 to your Buddy List  
scooterapd
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 21, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 14
Review Date: Aug 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Wide angle, lightweight, fast aperature.
Cons:
Not nearly as sharp as 17-55 EF-S for same $$. I witnessed flat colors, limited contrast on my 30D.

My 17-55mm f/2.8, which is my wedding workhorse, was sent to Canon due to an IS malfunction, so I rented this lens as a stand-in, using it on my 30-D. My 5-D is dedicated to my 70-200mm IS f/2.8L and I shoot with both the 30D and 5D during weddings. I was VERY disappointed in the 16-35mm. Compared to my 17-55 which is in the same price range, this lens is soft and grainy, even at f/5.6 and 35mm. I would only recommend this lens for full-frame cameras. If you're shooting with a 30D or 20D, GET THE 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens without thinking about it. In a recent "side-by-side comparison", my associate photographer shot a wedding with the 16-35mm on his 5D and my 17-55mm shots on my 30D look sharper and have more color saturation and contrast than his. Obviously, the L build quality is useful and if you are shooting full-frame, you don't have a choice, so those are some considerations as well. Overall, I'd consider the image quality of this lens on-par with my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.

Aug 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add scooterapd to your Buddy List  
Fred.
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 18, 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,191.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb image quality,Edge-to-edge sharpness,good performance across the zoom range, very well build.
Cons:
Price

This lens is amazing, the best wide-angle zoomlens I ever used.
perfect on a 5D or 1D.
I really like this lens.


Aug 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Fred. to your Buddy List  
tallberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 21, 2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 92
Review Date: Aug 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent image quality.
Cons:
None worth mentioning.

I upgraded from a 17-40, and have used this lens for landscapes on a 5D for two months at the time of writing. The 17/40 was not bad, but the corner sharpness of the 16/35II is really significantly better on a full-frame camera - well worth the upgrade. For me, this quickly became a lens which I can just use and forget - it does not seem to have any issues or restrictions that would need to be taken into account. This is a very good thing indeed. Highly recommended.

Aug 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tallberg to your Buddy List  
ianws
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 17, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Review Date: Aug 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: I have always wanted this lens but the original version didn't seem to be suited for digital cameras. But with encouraging review on FM and else where I recently took a leap of faith and invested in the MK11 version. After two Weddings with it on the 5D it ticks all the boxes, I'm not interested in all the Tech Speak - the images are just AWESOME !
Cons:
None

I can recommend this lens without hesitation - its also very good on the 1D MK11 - but shines on the 5D - a good lens for film re-invented for digital - full 10 out of 10 for Canon

Aug 5, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ianws to your Buddy List  
JKhoo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 19, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 625
Review Date: Jul 29, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,449.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Built. Optical quality.
Cons:

I did not think the difference would be so apparent compared to a 17-40 but it really is. Contrast and color is just lovely. Environmental portraits are a lot of fun with this beauty. Wide enough to suck in the surrounding and quick enough in low light. I like it!

Jul 29, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add JKhoo to your Buddy List  
hahr
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

Registered: Sep 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2137
Review Date: Jul 25, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,479.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: this lens is corner-sharp at f/11 on my 1DsII -- something i wasn't expecting from an ultrawide zoom lens.
Cons:
the size takes some getting used to as it's the length of a 135L but the width (at the top) of an 85L.



Jul 25, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add hahr to your Buddy List  
Zac Thomas
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 9, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 19, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: An amazing lens in all respects
Cons:
Non as yet except that I am still waiting for the 60 cash back from Canon :-)

I must agree with all the positive comments posted in this forum to date.
It is indeed an amazing lens which produces sharp beautiful images attached to my 1D mark111
An expensive lens but in my experience without rival.


Jul 19, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Zac Thomas to your Buddy List  
RCicala
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2988
Review Date: Jul 15, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,390.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb sharpness to the edges, low distortion, flare resistance is very good.
Cons:
None, within reason.

I've had the Mark I and it was a good lens in the center, weak outside of that. I'm one of those who adapted a Zeiss 21mm to get good edge sharpness on my full frame bodies, the Mark I 16-35 just didn't cut it.
The new version is a totally different beast - far sharper out from center, good sharpness to the edges. Not quite Zeiss 21 sharpness, but close and the Canon has less distortion, and, well, it zooms! This is an expensive lens that is worth every single dime. Finally a full frame wide zoom that's as good or better than anything else out there.


Jul 15, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RCicala to your Buddy List  
EveningSky
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 209
Review Date: Jul 13, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, excellent contrast, excellent colors
Cons:
Price

I am very impressed with this lens. It appears to do what it is supposed to do, very well. It is opening up new possiblities for WA photography for me.

Jul 13, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add EveningSky to your Buddy List  
Rob Webster
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 1, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5
Review Date: Jul 8, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: A positive improvement in terms of edge definition, particularly wide open, over the original version. Contrast is superb and distortion is not worth mentioning. Very pleased with the copy I have.
Cons:
None really. Would like to see it lower in price.

Bought this lens new as I am a fan of wide angle photography.
Thought originally about getting the Canon 14mm, but decided
that the 16-35mm was more suited to my needs. Very pleased with the purchase and consider the les to be a keeper.


Jul 8, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Rob Webster to your Buddy List  
Leo Somers
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 23, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 23, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Superb image quality, beautiful bokeh, very well build.
Cons:
None.

Congratulations Canon, you did it!! Finally this widezoom provides me the professional images I was hoping for. The 16-35 L II produces really superb images of exceptional quality, in every way: sharpness, color, contrast, everything is so great about this lens.
I sold my 17-40 L to get this lens. Yes, it is very expensive, but worth every penny. I was a little bit disappointed about the 17-40, because it wasn't really tack sharp. I even sent it to Canon to calibrate it. After that calibration it was much better, I really liked this lens, but yet I decided to go for the 16-35 II.
I use it on a 5D and the images are just outstanding, crispy clear, very sharp. Even at F2.8 this lens is amazing. The bokeh is so lovely. If you view the images on a 22" screen, be aware: sometimes you can't believe your eyes anymore Smile This lens is just fantastic!
The only minuspoint could be the 82mm filter size. I was using an expensive B&W 77mm slim circ. pol., which became useless, so I had to buy a 82.
For those who still hesitate to buy this lens I would say: wait no longer, but run to your supplier and buy this masterpiece. You won't regret your purchase, not even for a second.


Jun 23, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Leo Somers to your Buddy List  
veroman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3938
Review Date: Jun 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Edge-to-edge sharpness Low distortion Color and contrast Build
Cons:
None

This new 16-35mm is everything everyone says it is.

I had rented the original 16-35 f/2.8L for a couple of weeks or so in order to have a reference point. Aside from what I'd considered quite minor and expected edge distortion and softness, I thought the rented lens was pretty terrific. It had far less barrel distortion than I had anticipated or was expecting. Edge softness, though, was pretty apparent as was edge "stretching." Still, I liked that lens a lot and couldn't help but wonder in what ways the Mark II version could be an improvement.

Well, it's definitely an improvement and worth every one of the few extra dollars over the Mark I.

FYI: the Mark II was recently tested and compared to two all-time favorite wide angles (Olympus 18mm & Leica 19mm primes). The new Canon came out ahead in every respect, but particularly in the areas of edge distortion & edge softness. The review can be found at http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon1635ii_a/c1635ii_a1.html


Jun 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add veroman to your Buddy List  
nickminers
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 17, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 8
Review Date: Jun 17, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,300.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Full frame IQ, bokeh
Cons:
None

What Canon have achieved with this lens is nothing short of spectacular. To get a 16mm lens so sharp right to the edges of a full frame image (on an EOS 5D) with almost no CA is extremely impressive. Of course this comes at a high price but given how desirable this is it's worth every penny (or cent). The 82mm filter size may bother some but in my case I was replacing a Sigma wide angle lens with the same size so it's subjective. Possibly the ultimate wide-angle zoom.

Jun 17, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add nickminers to your Buddy List  
nivenu
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 16, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10
Review Date: Jun 6, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Super optics, very sharp, excellent contrast. Ive not noticed any flare. CA very slight at full aperture, but hardly noticeable. Highly recommend this fine lens.
Cons:
Usual 82mm filter size moan.



Jun 6, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add nivenu to your Buddy List  
XAOC
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 29, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 31, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great sharpness, color and bokeh. Great built quality. Fast focus.
Cons:
Price and 82mm filter

This is my first high quality lens that I own and the photos I get with this lens are great. It is fast and the photos are sharp. I just don't like the filter size, everything else is great.



http://antoski.com/tips.html


May 31, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add XAOC to your Buddy List  




Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
126 358697 Apr 18, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
91% of reviewers $1,493.19
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.73
7.97
9.1
16-35II


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