So on their tests it fair very well at 16mm and 20mm compared to the 17-40L and well across the board compared to the 16-35 II (although by a lesser margin at the wide end than vs the 17-40) for sharpness. I also has much less CA of all types than the 17-40L and 16-35 II.
But it lags a bit 24-35mm compared to 24-70 f/4 IS and even more compared to 24-70 II. It particularly pales just a bit compared to those center and mid-frame it seems, especially against the 24-70 II. I\'ve been a bit afraid of that from my initial snap around, but not sure yet. Although it does have less distortion at 24mm and even a touch less CA.
Jul 04, 2014 at 11:38 PM
Previous versions of skibum5's message #12448158 « Photozone Review: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS »
