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 358584 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 
      
EyeBrock
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 3, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1011
Review Date: May 29, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build, speed, bokeh, sharp, as well as the bloody good pictures I get from it.
Cons:
Price, price of filters, price of gas and Stella Artois,world peace.

Well, bit the bullet and shelled out my retro cheque on this very nice lens.
I got the 24-70 ten months ago (which I love dearly) and I toyed with the idea of buying a 5D to replace/add to my 20D. Change of plan.
I nearly bought the 17-40 but Ive got well used to 2.8 and my previous Tamron lens purchases have taught me that the cheaper option isnt the way for me. No disrespect to Tam owners but photography is all about personal choice. This lens is a porsche to Yamrons 17-35 2.8-4.

I choose Canon L lenses.

The 16-35 gives me the same kind of sharpness I get with the 24-70 at the real wide end. The 1.6 crop really was limiting me on the 24 end but 16 mm of ths lens makes a huge difference.
Great build quality (should be for $1840 Canadian!), and an easy transition from the 24-70.
Its about the same size and weight as the 24-105 but the 82mm filter size means I have to get another expensive cir pol and the Rodenstock UV filter cost more than my mates new Kodak point-and-shoot!
Great bokeh, fast, well built and sharp. What more could you want? Cheaper would have been nice!
No second guessing on this one. Great lens and my bag is complete. For now.


May 29, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add EyeBrock to your Buddy List  
Film_Ruled
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 653
Review Date: May 23, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,450.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Much better than the old version, better sharpness overall, especially from 16-22mm. Fantastic flare control, even better than Nikon's 17-35 2.8.
Cons:
82mm front filter size, but that is what step up rings are for.

I think what has happened in the digital and internet age is that we now have a bunch of cat and bird photographers who work in the software development field by day and do lens tests by night. So it is no surprise that everyone seems to be an expert when they do not know squat about optical limitations. Any ultra-wide 2.8 zoom is going to have limits and this one is no exception. But....the performance is indeed exceptional, well worth the price in my line of work. I would have paid $1,800 for this lens. Canon is the world leader in the digital photography world and this lens is yet one more reason why. Nikon simply can't touch the great lineup that Canon has. All the anti-full frame hype is just that: Hype. In real world use, this optic is outstanding. The color saturation, contrast and sharpness are only second to primes in the same range.

May 23, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Film_Ruled to your Buddy List  
D.K. Owens
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 6, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 18
Review Date: May 8, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.95 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Used outdoors, the sharpness of the lens stands out. Colorful landscapes are a bonus background.
Cons:
None.....

This lens is a fantastic ultra-wide angle tool. I've been able to shoot everything with crystal clear clarity and precision. SO much has been said about the "dark-cornering," but at f/9 there's no visible fall-off. I purchased this lens, refurbished by canon and so far, I've taken several printable lansdscape shots.

I was reluctant to purchase this lens because several reviewers had posted comments about "dark cornering." Used indoors, there maybe some, however, with flash and beyond the f/2.8 aperture, this lens is truly worth having.

I surmise that with the EOS 1Ds Mark II, this lens has greater capabilities. Using it with a full frame camera should alleviate any trepidation on the part of a prospective buyer.

My suggestion: go ahead, get it if you can afford it. The results, with the right settings are sure to produce some gems.


May 8, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add D.K. Owens to your Buddy List  
Harvison
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7
Review Date: May 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,579.99 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Constant wide aperture - A nice match for a full frame - Good color and contrast
Cons:
Slightly soft at corners wide open at 16mm.

I really like this lens overall. The soft issue mentioned above really isn't an issue, wide open is most often used in conjunction with a blurred background, so edge quality doesn't matter.

May 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Harvison to your Buddy List  
Sam Edwards
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 31, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 18
Review Date: Apr 27, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,600.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: f2.8 16mm Awesome Quality
Cons:
Price!

A good copy of this lens is as good as a super-wide-angle zoom is going to get for full frame. The corners are practically as sharp as the center at f4! Chroma aberation is hugely reduced compared to previous efforts. Canon has finally done it. I would postpone purchase if possible until the price comes in line with usual discounts.

Apr 27, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Sam Edwards to your Buddy List  
Julius
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 26, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 988
Review Date: Apr 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,479.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Excellent built quality like all Canon L lenses and very good performance in this wide angle range
Cons:
Price, 82mm filter thread.

My fist copy of this lens was not acceptable and I had to send it back but the second, replacement copy is definitely good enough to meet my expectations. Dont expect miracles from this lens and you wont be disappointed.
I have an excellent copy of the 17-40 f/4L lens and a perfect copy of the 24-70 f/2.8L lens, which I compared it to. It is better than my 17-40L lens up to and including f/5.6 and maybe, just maybe a touch better at f/8 at all corresponding focal lengths. At f/11-16 both of the lenses are equally sharp, the 16-35L II is a little better in the corners of the full size sensor image (5D). If you do not need the f/2.8, the extra 1mm at the wide-angle end and have a good copy of the 17-40L lens then you do not need this lens. Neither of these lenses comes even close at 35mm to the 24-70L lens, which is also noticeably better at f/2.8-5.6 at 24 and 28mm.
As a conclusion, this lens is definitely better than the previous version of this lens by at least 2 f/stop and slightly better than the 17-40L lens. It is not perfect but as good as it can be expected in this wide-angle zoom range and it is a keeper for me.


Apr 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Julius to your Buddy List  
ltravieso
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 1, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 13
Review Date: Apr 11, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,459.99 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent resolution the best super wide angle zoom I ever used specially at the edges.
Cons:
None

In my initial test photos this lens it is a big improvement over the older version and also the 17-40 lens,
Well controlled CA. In regards with the larger 82mm filter it is a very good design now you can used polarizer filters with no vignette.


Apr 11, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ltravieso to your Buddy List  
rathman
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 555
Review Date: Apr 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great image quality, fast focus, low CA, great improvement over the previous version
Cons:
A little soft at the extreme corners for pixel-peepers, 82mm filters, expensive

Center is sharp at 2.8 across the zoom range. Corners are slightly soft below f8 but acceptable. Seems to be more flare resistant than previous model - maybe because front element "retracts" as zoomed from 16 to 35? A little heavier and larger the earlier version but hardly noticable. Overall, I'm happy with the improvements.

Apr 5, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rathman to your Buddy List  
Remford
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Aug 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1392
Review Date: Apr 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Outstanding edge to edge - vices of original 16-35 rectified. Excellent throughout entire focal length range with far better stray light control. Great L build and feel.
Cons:
Only 82mm in L lineup - unique filter required.



Apr 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Remford to your Buddy List  
neilgundel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 2, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 31
Review Date: Apr 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness Contrast Build Quality
Cons:
82mm filters not common with other Canon lenses. Price is somewhat high right now, may come down. Probably little or no improvement over 17-40L unless you have a full frame sensor.

At last there is a Canon lens covering this range with really good performance across the zoom range and corner to corner on a full frame camera such as the 1Ds mark II.

It has the usual stellar build quality you expect on the top tier "L" lenses.

Image quality is excellent, but if you have been spoiled by Canon's "L" telephotos, you should be aware that _nobody_ makes a lens in this category that is anything like them in terms of performance. Still, it is a clear improvement over the 17-40 in that regard on a full frame camera, especially at the wide end.


Apr 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add neilgundel to your Buddy List  
white
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 31
Review Date: Apr 2, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: A notable improvement over the previously very decent lens. The improvement in the corners is more noticeable at the wide end. The best ultra-wide I have used.
Cons:
We always want more.

I perform my testing in the real world of hyper-focalized compositions that occur in landscape photography. Some lenses fall apart more in these situations as they try to control aberrations on near and far distances at the same time. Some lenses that are great on a flat surface fall apart more in landscape work. This is the best retro-focus wide I have seen for landscape work, zoom or fixed focus. This looks better than my Blad 40CF and 50CF.

Apr 2, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add white to your Buddy List  
mbailey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 333
Review Date: Mar 31, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,598.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great feel and build. Quick silent focus. Sharp though-out focal range and aperatures. Not too much more $ than the mk1.
Cons:
Expensive filters.



Mar 31, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mbailey to your Buddy List  
tom guffey
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 574
Review Date: Mar 31, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Improvement over the original, especially around the perimeter of the len - sharper that first series. Clean and extremly clear throughout the working range of the lens. Solid, superb autofocus - a little faster than the original. Typical "L" seires feel to the lens.
Cons:
The 82mm filter - even where I purchased it, Glazier's in Seattle, didint stock any 82mm filters. Was hoping that the prising would be better.....but, you get what you pay for. A little heafty, but to be expected on a lens this wide and fast.



Mar 31, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tom guffey to your Buddy List  
sjms
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Mar 20, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 20982
Review Date: Mar 30, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,470.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Wide as i want it on a FF camera
Cons:
At f2.8 still isn't what i expected. better then the 1st gen but still falls a little short in FF.

FF view 1Ds2
while it is an improvement over its previous namesake at wide open at 16mm the lower right corner it soft. move up to the smaller apertures and it is quite a nice lens. i kind of expected i higher quality image. it is more of a marginal improvement overall. i will need to give it a good work out and see.


Mar 30, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sjms 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 358584 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