It's just my guess that, with the better the glass elements and correction for vignetting, periperal sharpness, etc, there will be less distortion as well.
Gijs wrote:
If the new lens exhibited less barrel distortion, why wouldn't Canon advertise that? So far all they say is that the peripheral sharpness is better.
The fact that it uses an 82mm instead of a 77mm filter thread really turns me off from buying it since I prefer to share my filters with my other L lens. Having another set of 82mm filters just for 1 lens is unnecessary added dead weight to what I would normally carry on a mountaineering trip. In my case, having the original 16-35 f2.8 L USM is my best choice. Practicality & usability wins over latest tech for me.
Mike1 wrote:
The fact that it uses an 82mm instead of a 77mm filter thread really turns me off from buying it since I prefer to share my filters with my other L lens. Having another set of 82mm filters just for 1 lens is unnecessary added dead weight to what I would normally carry on a mountaineering trip. In my case, having the original 16-35 f2.8 L USM is my best choice. Practicality & usability wins over latest tech for me.
Increasing the front element(s) size was probably a necessity if corner performance on full frame was to be improved significantly. Canon made a choice with the original 16-35 to keep it's "semi-standard" 77 mm filter size, but that choice was likely a compromise. Yes, it allowed filter interchangeability with the 24-70, 70-200, 100-400, and perhaps some primes. But, it also may have put some constraints on the design of the lens.
If the new version has the improvements that Canon indicates, I will be buying one.
Mike1 wrote:
The fact that it uses an 82mm instead of a 77mm filter thread really turns me off from buying it since I prefer to share my filters with my other L lens. Having another set of 82mm filters just for 1 lens is unnecessary added dead weight to what I would normally carry on a mountaineering trip. In my case, having the original 16-35 f2.8 L USM is my best choice. Practicality & usability wins over latest tech for me.
Based on the bodies listed in your signature (1DII and 30D), there wouldn't be much point in getting the new lens anyway. The original 16-35L should be just as good on those bodies.
It's on FF that the newer lens will hopefully be a nice improvement.
Mike Hatam wrote:
Based on the bodies listed in your signature (1DII and 30D), there wouldn't be much point in getting the new lens anyway. The original 16-35L should be just as good on those bodies.
It's on FF that the newer lens will hopefully be a nice improvement.
Studying the charts, I feel that there will be significant improvement even for the 1.3x/1.25x format. Not so much wide open, but at f/8 the 10 lpm numbers are roughly 85% vs 92% (old vs. new) and the 30 lpm is roughly 50% vs. 80%. So it'll make a difference on the 1D2 and 2n, but a HUGE difference on the new 1D3. The 16-35 Mk2 will provide very, very even sharpness across the frame for all 1D bodies.
I agree that the 1.6x crop cameras will see only some marginal improvements, but also some decrease for more of the frame.
p.9 #10 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I will be in Hong Kong in the 2nd half of March too. I have contacted one store there and they have no idea of when they might expect to receive this lens. I doubt very much that it will arrive before end March.
p.9 #12 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
bobbytan wrote:
I will be in Hong Kong in the 2nd half of March too. I have contacted one store there and they have no idea of when they might expect to receive this lens. I doubt very much that it will arrive before end March.
Bobby, the lens will be available by the end of March, probably the 3rd or 4th week. You may want to extend your stay in HK for that then . Any price indication from that part of the world, BTW?
p.9 #13 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
As I view the MTF charts the wide open edge performance of both new and old lenses is similar so available light photographers might pause before spending extra $$ for this new lens.
p.9 #14 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Joshua - no can extend my stay in HK! No indication of the pricing from them. Peter and I will be flying to Singapore for a few days, from HK. With a bit of luck I may be able to pick one up when I am in Singapore, although I have a pre-order with Amazon ($1,599 with free shipping) and they are expecting to ship it during the first week of April.
AGeoJO wrote:
Bobby, the lens will be available by the end of March, probably the 3rd or 4th week. You may want to extend your stay in HK for that then . Any price indication from that part of the world, BTW?
p.9 #15 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
SoundHound wrote:
As I view the MTF charts the wide open edge performance of both new and old lenses is similar so available light photographers might pause before spending extra $$ for this new lens.
i think because they enlarged the filter thread on the new 16-35 it has a wider image circle meaning even on FF the edges wont be in the actual photo like they were with the old lens meaning more sweet spot thats actually captured, thats my take on it, but i dont know squat about optics
p.9 #16 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
SoundHound wrote:
As I view the MTF charts the wide open edge performance of both new and old lenses is similar so available light photographers might pause before spending extra $$ for this new lens.
I agree. From the MTF's, the most improvement is had at the wide end when stopped down (f/8, in the case of the MTF chart).
I look forward to some serious new vs old comparisons once the lens is available!
p.9 #17 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
I don't know squat about optics either but this makes a lot of sense. Besides, Canon would not release this Mk II version if the IQ improvements are only marginal. They are well aware of the fact that we have been bitching and moaning for years about the unsatisfactory quality of most of their wide angle lenses, and that many Canon users have resorted to using Leica, Zeiss, Olympus and even Nikon w/a angle lenses on their Canon bodies. This is very possibly the best UWA zoom lens ever made!
tom mcconville wrote:
i think because they enlarged the filter thread on the new 16-35 it has a wider image circle meaning even on FF the edges wont be in the actual photo like they were with the old lens meaning more sweet spot thats actually captured, thats my take on it, but i dont know squat about optics
p.9 #18 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
Pardon the interruption....with the exception of selling my CZ21 to a younger person with better eye sight, does anyone know if someone has found a way to use the CZ21 on a Canon 1DsMarkII (or 1DsMarkIII) body with autofocus? Thank you.
p.9 #19 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
stanbrown wrote:
Pardon the interruption....with the exception of selling my CZ21 to a younger person with better eye sight, does anyone know if someone has found a way to use the CZ21 on a Canon 1DsMarkII (or 1DsMarkIII) body with autofocus? Thank you.
Use an 'AF Confirm' adapter (I use one from a seller named 'happypagehk' on *bay) and look in the Alternative Forum here:
p.9 #20 · 'Master' EF 1635mm f/2.8L II USM Thread
stanbrown wrote:
Pardon the interruption....with the exception of selling my CZ21 to a younger person with better eye sight, does anyone know if someone has found a way to use the CZ21 on a Canon 1DsMarkII (or 1DsMarkIII) body with autofocus? Thank you.
IMHO, the AF confimation for this lens is not necessary. You just rely on the extended depth of field this UWA lens has to offer. Stop down to f/5.6 or f/8.0 and use the hyperfocal method and done. This is pretty much a lens for landscape shooters anyway.
