Canon F4 16-35mm IS L Lens

It's an excellent little lens and rivals the 70-200/2.8 MkII in optical quality....certainly far ahead of the 16-35/2.8, 17-40/4 and the 24-70's in terms of resolution and contrast across the frame. Ideal for landscapes on a budget and it's only drawback (that I've found) is that it can flare if the sun is in, or near, the frame.

Bob
 
Hi,

Thanks for the replies, read a lot of Reviews and your comments. Pulled the trigger and ordered one, came today and after a quick try it's looking Good.

Regards.
 
It's an excellent little lens and rivals the 70-200/2.8 MkII in optical quality....certainly far ahead of the 16-35/2.8, 17-40/4 and the 24-70's in terms of resolution and contrast across the frame. Ideal for landscapes on a budget and it's only drawback (that I've found) is that it can flare if the sun is in, or near, the frame.

Bob

I'm still considering whether or not to upgrade to this lens from the 17-40 which I use for 95% of my landscape stuff. Is it worth the upgrade optically?
 
I'm still considering whether or not to upgrade to this lens from the 17-40 which I use for 95% of my landscape stuff. Is it worth the upgrade optically?
I have a couple of IR converted 5D2's and used them for landscapes with a 17-40. Shooting IR is best when the sun is bright and contrast is high but the edges of the frame always looked muted even shooting at f/8-f/11. The 16-35 has eliminated this problem although I originally got it for the IS (manual focus, hand held at 10x in Liveview was always a challenge).
In short, I'd be amazed if you couldn't see a benefit....and a worthwhile one at that.

Bob
 
I'm still considering whether or not to upgrade to this lens from the 17-40 which I use for 95% of my landscape stuff. Is it worth the upgrade optically?

It is an obvious upgrade unless you are shooting into the sun at f/18 all day in which case it isn't.
 
Back
Top