p.27 #1 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I got my 16-35L II on Monday, and have finally had a chance to take a few test shots with it.
I'll post some test shots, and a more complete assessment, in a week or two when my work schedule calms down.
But for now, I can tell you this...
I'm quite pleased with this lens. My copy is very sharp between 19mm - 30mm. Between 16-18mm, and 31-35mm, it's sharp enough that I wouldn't hesitate to use it. But it really shines in the mid-section of the zoom-range.
I don't care about wide-open performance - I'm mainly using the lens for landscape work, so all my test shots were f8 and f11.
At those focal lengths, and apertures, I see a marked improvement over the 17-40 and the original 16-35.
p.27 #2 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
cactusclay wrote:
I was hoping that this lens was going to be sharp wide open. I really would like to have at least a 35 2.8 that was sharp at 2.8 out of this thing. 20 and 24 would be nice at 2.8 as well. Most lenses are pretty sharp stopped down to F8, so I guess I'm not seeing the value of this new lens yet.
Do you shoot full-frame? If you do, then you'd know that very few wide angle lenses are sharp across the frame, even at f8 or f11. Hence the popularity of lenses such as Zeiss 21 on Canon FF D-SLRs.
p.27 #3 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
OK, guys, you've had 'em long enough. We want to see reports. We want details, pictures! How's it look on a 5D? How does it compare to the 17-40 in the corners? Come on, get with the program! We want to see what you got for your hard earned money before we part with our hard earned dollars.
p.27 #4 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
mgipe wrote:
OK, guys, you've had 'em long enough. We want to see reports. We want details, pictures! How's it look on a 5D? How does it compare to the 17-40 in the corners? Come on, get with the program! We want to see what you got for your hard earned money before we part with our hard earned dollars.
--M
Take a look at some of the postings a few pages back. There are several examples by some fellow FMers with the new lens.
p.27 #5 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I received my 16-35L II lens but had focus calibration issues with it and returned it. The first test shots came out very soft at the edges at focal lengths 16-24mm but I found out that the lens badly front focused. When I autofocused the 17-40L lens, it focused to infinity (it should since the distance was over 100 feet) but the 16-35L II lens focused a lot closer. When I autofocused the 16-35L II lens at 35 mm and then changed the focal length to 16mm and 20mm the pictures came out fine and sharp. I will definitely get another one later since it is a good lens.
I posted some comparison test shots on Pbase between the 16-35L II and the 17-40L lenses, which were taken at 20mm and f/8. You can see side by side the two lenses comparing them at 100%, the left bottom corner, the left edge at the center, the center of the image, the right bottom corner and the right edge at the center.
Here are the links, look at the pictures at the original size. The pictures were taken using my 5D and shot in RAW format from tripod, converted in CS2 with basic (25) sharpening and have titles:
p.27 #6 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Julius wrote:
I posted some comparison test shots on Pbase between the 16-35L II and the 17-40L lenses, which were taken at 20mm and f/8. You can see side by side the two lenses comparing them at 100%, the left bottom corner, the left edge at the center, the center of the image, the right bottom corner and the right edge at the center.
Here are the links, look at the pictures at the original size. The pictures were taken using my 5D and shot in RAW format from tripod, converted in CS2 with basic (25) sharpening and have titles:
p.27 #8 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
khurram1 wrote:
i just picked up the 5D a couple of days ago and hope that it will be good on the full frame as well. Do you notice any vignetting at all with your 1DsII
Yes and quite noticeable at f/2.8, almost gone at f/4.0 and gone at f/5.6 under regular shooting circimstances; I didn't shoot a white blank wall with other words.
p.27 #9 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Hey All
I just recieved my 16-35 II, with a Hoya 82mm S-HMC UV Pro 1 filter. I noticed the filter gets mighty close to the lense when i put it on. At 16mm I feel like the lense is hitting the filter or it is getting really close. Also my autofocus sounds very different? Like a echo sound. Weird. Anyone have autofocus sound issues? Thanks
p.27 #10 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
My autofocus sounds normal - you basically can't hear it. Maybe yours is slapping against the filter?
Seriously, I haven't received my filters yet, but I did notice with a little concern that the front element appears to stick out a little close for comfort vs. the filter threads. I would think you could tell though by operating the zoom gently with & without the filter & see if you could detect a difference.
p.27 #11 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Film_Ruled wrote:
A lens like that would have a 95mm filter size, wiegh at least 2.5 pounds and be in excess of $5,000.
Well, Canon could produce a 17 or 18mm L prime. My 30 year old 18mm Zuiko is even smaller than my 50/1.4 and sharp edge to edge on full frame. Would of course be a little bigger with an USM motor but certainly not an impossible task.
p.27 #13 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
hauxon wrote:
Well, Canon could produce a 17 or 18mm L prime. My 30 year old 18mm Zuiko is even smaller than my 50/1.4 and sharp edge to edge on full frame. Would of course be a little bigger with an USM motor but certainly not an impossible task.
corner sharpness also has to do with the sensor and FF sensors will be the next to see an upgrade in microlens size, angle, and placement for optimal results. i'd bet money that the 14/2.8L shows better results when FF sensors get upgraded.
p.27 #15 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
RoyPertchi wrote:
That's pretty darn sharp, corner to corner, near to far. F8 performance looks great.
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but exactly how do you check for corner sharpness with a distant building and the sky in the corners?
p.27 #16 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
After navigating to the original size pic, I scrolled up to the upper left cornet, where the top of the building on the left reaches almost to the corner... sharp. Then I scrolled down to the bottom left corner; side walk cement is sharp. Right lower corner; sharp. Upper right; where glass building gets close to corner; also sharp. Center of image; distant building nice and sharp, too.
p.27 #17 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Gotcha. I don't know if someone has already mentioned this, but I noticed the Digital Picture site has the 16-35/2 on the ISO chart and it actually looks pretty good.
p.27 #18 · 'Master' EF 16–35mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
cactusclay wrote:
Gotcha. I don't know if someone has already mentioned this, but I noticed the Digital Picture site has the 16-35/2 on the ISO chart and it actually looks pretty good.
what site is this could you provide the address
