Canongraphers
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to CanonGraphers. Enjoy your stay here!

Click here to access the gallery
 
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: EF 16-35L f/2.8 Mk II  (Read 2068 times)
Dream Merchant
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Posts: 709


« on: April 18, 2008, 08:17:23 AM »

Hi guys,

Just wondering if anyone has this lens? How do you find it in general?

Is it good for blow-ups up to say 20x30 from either 1.6xcrop or FF bods? Is it worth it's price?

I've read and seen contradicting tests on this lens, so I just wanted actual user feedback.

Thanks for reading.
Logged
UKay
Committee
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Posts: 1405


Love... Fame & Fortune...


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2008, 10:35:45 AM »

i have seen my friends pictures taken with this.. at F8.. its sper sharp edge to edge... i asked him about the performance of the lens n he is very happy with it... usually uses it to shoot weddeings n events, i guess it good enough for him... he is one of the more popular full time wedding photographers.  thats wad i know. hope it answers alittle of your questions.
Logged

Whatever turns you on... Grin
www.ukayphotography.com
boredphuck
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1011


"Assumptions is the mother of all f*ck ups."


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2008, 12:12:57 PM »

how bad is the distortion on this lens?
Logged

"It requires less character to discover the faults of others than is does to tolerate them." - J. Petit Senn
hwchoy
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1859



WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2008, 12:15:49 PM »

I used the mark I and even that is pretty good with sharpness. of course there is barrel distortion at the wide end but not excessively so like the EF-S 17-85.
Logged

Dream Merchant
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Posts: 709


« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2008, 01:53:26 PM »

Thanks a lot guys. Appreciate it.  Wink
Logged
Michael
Committee
Legendary CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Posts: 3266


i SHOOT, therefore i PRINT


« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2008, 05:19:23 PM »

good lens. less distortion than 17-40. a little bit of vignetting. frigging huge 82mm filter.
Logged

absolute power corrupts absolutely. canon is powerful and corrupted my CF card.
Kwanon
CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 190


« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2008, 05:57:55 PM »

I used the mark I and even that is pretty good with sharpness. of course there is barrel distortion at the wide end but not excessively so like the EF-S 17-85.

yes my 17-85 is a horror for group shots. some poor random person's face will just turn oval-shaped around the edges of the photo.

kinda off topic, but with a polariser + uv filter on 17-85, i have to go at least 25mm or so to get rid of the vignetting.
Logged
victor
Administrator
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Posts: 781


« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2008, 06:56:46 PM »

I love my 16-35 Mk II deep deep...much better then 17-40
Logged
evershine
Senior CanonGrapher

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1005



WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2008, 12:25:19 PM »

This lens is good.. tried...  but whether justify the cost or not..its hard to tell since not much competition and not many manuf or third party can provide similar performance and quality.

« Last Edit: April 19, 2008, 04:56:28 PM by jediforce4ever » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Page created in 0.436 seconds with 18 queries.