Canon EF 16-35 F/4L IS - Mackguyver's Review

[mackguyver]

Given the interest in this lens and the limitations on my time, I'll go ahead and start posting the various pieces of my review here, starting with the infamous brick wall tests. Since everyone seems most interested in the performance at f/11 and f/16, I'll get started with that. I shot the other apertures and some real-world stuff, and will post those in the coming days.

Photos in this gallery compare the 16-35 f/4 IS to:

1. TS-E 17/f4 at 16/17mm
2. TS-E 24 f/4 II, 24 f/1.4 II, and 24-70 f/2.8 II at 24mm
3. 24-70 f/2.8 II at 24mm at 35mm

http://www.ianandersonphotography.com/Other-Work/Samples/18380171_8wZhRL#!i=1416492110&k=BxP74wb
(starting with photo labelled "2014-07-04 14...")

Notes:
1. All photos are JPEG (max quality) screen captures of side-by-side comparisons in PS CC 2014 of TIFF files processed in DxO 9.5 using the "No Corrections" setting
2. The files and are labeled (typo and all ) with the lens model, focal length & aperture as shown in the subwindow in PS
3. Photos are shown in the following order - (1) full frame, (2) center @100%, (3) top-left corner @100%, and (4) bottom-right corner @100%. The top-left is darker, bottom-right is brighter showing more CA.
4. Click on the "O" or "Original" size at the top of the screen to see / save & download the photos at full size.
5. Camera settings - 5DIII, Av, ISO 100, tripod, cable release

Bonus: the gallery also contains an informal (read: personal) comparison of the EF 14 f/2.8 II, 24 f/1.4 II, & Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 II I did a few years ago.

Feel free to ask questions (and complain about my technique, etc ) about these boring photos and stay tuned for more.

 

[Dylan777]

Crappy review, too many photos to look at

Why don't you make a video review and post it on youtube so I can watch it. My time is more valuable than your ;D

 

[mackguyver]

Crappy review, too many photos to look at

Why don't you make a video review and post it on youtube so I can watch it. My time is more valuable than your ;D

LOL, but you forgot the "does this make me a _____" line ;D

Also, as I said, I'll get them all together for a nice slick review, but wanted to share the raw (pun intended) elements of it (for now).

For a quick summary - I think the most noticeable thing is how little CA the new lens has, how much contrast it has, particularly at 16mm, and how sharp the TS-E 24 II is - wow!

Of course, the caveat is that there are certain things the 16-35 f/4 IS simply can't do that the TS-E lenses can - for example:

This angle of the ugly Florida Capitol building, as shot with the 16-35 f/4 IS:

Similar shot with the TS-E 17 - shifted:

 

[Dylan777]

Crappy review, too many photos to look at

Why don't you make a video review and post it on youtube so I can watch it. My time is more valuable than your ;D

LOL, but you forgot the "does this make me a _____" line ;D

Also, as I said, I'll get them all together for a nice slick review, but wanted to share the raw (pun intended) elements of it (for now).

For a quick summary - I think the most noticeable thing is how little CA the new lens has, how much contrast it has, particularly at 16mm, and how sharp the TS-E 24 II is - wow!

Of course, the caveat is that there are certain things the 16-35 f/4 IS simply can't do that the TS-E lenses can - for example:

This angle of the ugly Florida Capitol building, as shot with the 16-35 f/4 IS:

Similar shot with the TS-E 17 - shifted:

Great stuff man. Thanks for sharing all photos. Helped a lot.

 

[ahsanford]

Thanks for posting -- the hard work is appreciated!

- A

 

[mackguyver]

Thanks for posting -- the hard work is appreciated!

- A

I'm happy to be of assistance - I just wish I had more time to do the review.