 |
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 15, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp even to edges, solid build
|
|
Cons:
|
Tad expensive
|
|
This lens was an upgrade from the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. Although the 10-22mm is great value for money with good image quality, this L lens beats it hands down. Edges are much sharper, very good (either I have a good model or else any soft edges don't show up on a 20D). Fast autofocus and solid build, I rate this better than my 24-70mm f/2.8L.
For samples, see my photos from Switzerland on my website, the majority taken by the 16-35mm f/2.8L II, the rest with the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
www.filipmakowski.com
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2008
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent image quality, fast AF, very little CA
|
|
Cons:
|
Edge sharpness when wide open
|
|
I upgraded to this lens from a Sigma EX 24-70mm f/2.8. Compared to the Sigma, autofocus is very fast, even on a 20D, and shows very little in the way of cromatic aberrations. While the Sigma had around 3% of images out of focus, this Canon is very accurate with only 0.3% of images (if that) out of focus. Image quality on both lenses is excellent, although the colour and contrast are slightly better on the Canon.
The only downside is slightly soft edges when the lens is open wider that f/4.0, but I expect you'll get that from anything but a prime; saying that the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II has better edge sharpness.
For sample images, see my Morocco photos where the majority were taken by the 24-70mm (the rest by the 16-35mm f/2.8L II or a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX):
www.filipmakowski.com
All in all a great zoom lens, although I have to give it only a 9/10 for the soft edges (compared to even better edge sharpness and a 10/10 for the 16-35mm II).
|
|
|
|
|
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast AF, very little CA, great image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Soft edges when wide open
|
|
I upgraded to this lens from a Sigma EX 24-70mm f/2.8. Compared to the Sigma, autofocus is very fast, even on a 20D, and shows very little in the way of cromatic aberrations. While the Sigma had around 3% of images out of focus, this Canon is very accurate with only 0.3% of images (if that) out of focus. Image quality on both lenses is excellent, although the colour and contrast are slightly better on the Canon.
The only downside is slightly soft edges when the lens is open wider that f/4.0, but I expect you'll get that from anything but a prime.
For sample images, see my Morocco photos where the majority were taken by the 24-70mm (the rest by a Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II or a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX):
www.filipmakowski.com
All in all a great zoom lens, although I have to give it only a 9/10 for the soft edges (compared to even better edge sharpness and a 10/10 for the 16-35mm II)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
