Dehowie
Topic Author
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 11:13 am

Hi Guys
Just wondering how soft your 16-35L's are in the corners when shooting at F2.8.
I just picked one up and its pretty average compared to my 17-40L which is outstanding when operating wide open at F4.
Just wondering if i have a dud 16-35L or an awesome 17-40L.
Thanks
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:10 pm

I rented one as a trial and did not notice any softness in the corners. It seemed very sharp across the entire range. But not having any planned use for it at this time I opted not to purchase it.

--Jeff
 
Dehowie
Topic Author
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:20 pm

Thanks Jeff.
I am thinking of renting another to do a bit of a comparison and see just how soft it is.
Looking at some of Fred Miranda's 3.2 photo's it looks real soft.
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 9:43 pm

Been using it for a while now- never any soft problems at all

JP
 
fireguy274
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:15 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 9:48 pm

I bought one and returned it Dehowie...I read alot of reviews on it and some people found the same thing...I found the pictures very average. I have a 17-40 which I feel is sharper...Just my opinion....Artie
 
Dehowie
Topic Author
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sat Jun 05, 2004 10:25 pm

Thanks Guys
Its quite ok across the centre but the corners are far softer than the 17-40.
OPtions at the moment are to keep it and use my 17-40 which is a ripper and just use the 16-35 for low light work.
Same here Artie it seems Canon have real issues with the QC when it come to lenses worth big big money.
Many people have returned 16-35's for this exact reason(softness when wide open)and even the good ones don't seem to match at least my 17-40.
Thanks for the input guys.
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
chris78cpr
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:44 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Sun Jun 06, 2004 8:01 am

The 16-35 is well known for being inferior and a lot less ahrper thant the 17-40! i nearly bought it but was told and showed the 17-40 being alot sharper!!!

Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Mon Jun 07, 2004 3:22 am

There's a head-to-head comparison here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-17-40.shtml
Cheers,
Eduard
 
hkg_clk
Posts: 980
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 2:56 pm

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:04 am

That comparison is really interesting. I've got the 16-35, and I actually bought it just before the 17-40 came out... I am very surprised that the cheaper lens can beat the more expensive one in so many areas.

But I must also say that the 17-40 is a little dark at f4. Even some cheap third-party ultra wides are faster.
See my homepage for a comprehensive guide to spotting and photography at HKG
 
Dehowie
Topic Author
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: 16-35L Question For Owners.

Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:40 am

I think it still comes down to Canons very poor quality control for there L lenses.
I took me two exchanges to get a good 17-40 and the one i have is very nice indeed.
Has great sharpness at F4,good color and overall is very nice.
Needing the F2.8 i have picked up a 16-35 with the intention of selling the 17-40.
However like many many others i have got a 16-35 which is very nice from F3.2-3.6 upwards but is soft as in the corners at 2.8.
Given that you buy this lens over the 17-40 for the 2.8 and its pretty impressive price you would get a product which is at least usable.
Like many others i am in the dissapointed 16-35 users group.
If you can find a good one they are awesome but from reading it seems like thats about 1 in 5 who atually do get a good one.
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests