16-35 f4 IS overall quality

[Patak]

Recently i got 16-35 IS and cannot be happier with it. Compared to 24-70 II it is lighter, easier to use and the build quality appeals to me. Having mostly plastic body reduced the weight, but the nicest touch is the internal focusing and zooming. The image quality is simply outstanding. i do not mind f4 since i use it mostly outside, and for the inside i use it with the flash. Almost every shot is a "keeper". When images are transferred to the computer, i do need to correct exposure more so than with any other lens.

What is your take on this lens? How would you compare it to any other WA lens zoom or prime?

 

[bholliman]

I love mine! This is my first full frame UWA zoom, so I have nothing to compare it with. But, I'm happy with it in every way: IQ, flare/ca control, build, size, weight, handling and price. Canon hit a home run with this lens.

 

[agierke]

I'm curious about the low light focus speed and accuracy of this lens coupled with a 5d3. Anyone out there put it through its paces on a wedding reception?

I usually would not consider any lens slower than 2.8 for an application like this but if the focus speed and accuracy can deliver in a challenging environment like a wedding reception I could go for it.

Image samples of some wedding action would be groovy.

 

[geekpower]

I'm curious about the low light focus speed and accuracy of this lens coupled with a 5d3. Anyone out there put it through its paces on a wedding reception?

I usually would not consider any lens slower than 2.8 for an application like this but if the focus speed and accuracy can deliver in a challenging environment like a wedding reception I could go for it.

Image samples of some wedding action would be groovy.

not quite the comparison you are after, but on a recent trip to Montana I took some pics in the very dark hotel lobby of my wife posing with a stuffed grizzly bear using a 6d. iirc settings were f4, 1/40th, iso 10,000, no flash. turned out really nice. lots of detail on the fur etc. i didn't notice any hunting with the AF at all.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

I very recently acquired the 16-35 F4 L IS and 24-70 F2.8 L ii to replacce my 17-40 F4 L and 24-105 F4 L IS.
So far I am very happy with both, though I have had few opportunities to use then so far!

In the case of the 16-35 F4 L IS I feel that the colours are very nearly as good as the 17-40. This is high praise in my books as I have yet to find a lens that renders colour as nicely as the Canon 17-40L. In every other respect the new 16-35 F4 L IS is simply a better lens, giving far less distortion and much greater resolution away from the image center. The only thing I cannot fathom with this lens is why they put IS on it! I cannot help feeling that this lens may have been even better without the extra (dead) element that the IS requires - regardless it is a fine lens.
My 24-70 F2.8 ii complements the 16-35 F4 very well and I am just loving the initial results. However, without the internal focusing, it does feel a bit untidy in comparison. Strange for a lens that costs nearly twice as much! The optics are top notch though.