Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images

[Deleted member 7828]

Interesting, thanks for the samples.

Just wish it was 2.8, that's all. Maybe that's coming later. The existing 16-35 2.8 I find to be just OK, plagued by super-soft corners even stopped down (seems like this phenomenon is worst at infinity focus). In fact, the quality drop-off from center to edges can be striking sometimes...

But...at least it gets to 2.8 for usability indoors. That's enough for me to keep it for now. Although...admittedly I'd sooner grab the 24-70 for events...

 

[Dylan777]

I am thinking... wrapped in a box under the Christmas tree this year... I am not a professional, but this will complement my other two zoom lens. I love IS... too bad the 24-70 II IS is not yet.

Soon or later, it will come 8)

 

[mackguyver]

I am thinking... wrapped in a box under the Christmas tree this year... I am not a professional, but this will complement my other two zoom lens. I love IS... too bad the 24-70 II IS is not yet.

Soon or later, it will come 8)

Don't you mean $$$ooner or later, it will come ;D :'( 8)

 

[Dylan777]

I am thinking... wrapped in a box under the Christmas tree this year... I am not a professional, but this will complement my other two zoom lens. I love IS... too bad the 24-70 II IS is not yet.

Soon or later, it will come 8)

Don't you mean $$$ooner or later, it will come ;D :'( 8)

I think you right, "sooner or later"..... ;D

In term of UWA, I'm standing btw the bridge of Canon DSLR and Sony a7r mirrorless. If I'm 100% commit to Canon DSLR, then, 1D X and 5D III combo is definitely on my purchase list.

SOLD my 16-35 II and 50L last week, I have about $2800 on hand. If I sell A7r + Zeiss FE 55mm + one current 5D III, I think I have enough $$$ for brand new 1D X and new 16-35 f4 IS.

Of course, that is just an illogical plan in my shooting.....

 

[mackguyver]

Dylan, that's an interesting plan and the 1D X is a beauty (and a perfect compliment to the 5DIII) if you decide to go that way. I need to sell my 16-35 II, too, but haven't had time to take photos of it yet...thankfully it's almost the weekend...

I'm really intrigued by the IS and the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. If I'm shooting at f/11-16 anyways, why not have another couple of stops to play with? Also, with UWA lenses, I find myself needing more freedom to explore different angles and shooting heights, and find tripods limiting in terms of finding the best composition. I have the very fortunate gift of being able to keep horizons and lines straight in the viewfinder, so maybe this lens and I will make great partners

 

[Ruined]

Dylan, that's an interesting plan and the 1D X is a beauty (and a perfect compliment to the 5DIII) if you decide to go that way. I need to sell my 16-35 II, too, but haven't had time to take photos of it yet...thankfully it's almost the weekend...

I'm really intrigued by the IS and the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. If I'm shooting at f/11-16 anyways, why not have another couple of stops to play with? Also, with UWA lenses, I find myself needing more freedom to explore different angles and shooting heights, and find tripods limiting in terms of finding the best composition. I have the very fortunate gift of being able to keep horizons and lines straight in the viewfinder, so maybe this lens and I will make great partners

Mack, given your outdoors focus this lens does appear to make more sense for you than the 16-35 II. I think the extra sharpness and smaller size will be more useful than f/2.8.

I am definitely holding onto my 16-35 II, however. I want a UWA for events and sometimes f/2.8 is even too slow, so an f/4 lens is basically out of the question. I have a 24L, but it does not do 16mm or have the flexibility of the 16-35. I am skeptical Canon can make a 16-35 f/2.8 that is massively better than the II without making the lens much larger or bulbous. Looking at other lenses available, I do not see any that exist that have better IQ at f/2.8 and a similar zoom range without much, much larger size and weight. Also, I personally have found IS much less effective at focal lengths such as 28-35mm.

This does give me a good idea for a survey, though

 

[mackguyver]

Dylan, that's an interesting plan and the 1D X is a beauty (and a perfect compliment to the 5DIII) if you decide to go that way. I need to sell my 16-35 II, too, but haven't had time to take photos of it yet...thankfully it's almost the weekend...

I'm really intrigued by the IS and the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. If I'm shooting at f/11-16 anyways, why not have another couple of stops to play with? Also, with UWA lenses, I find myself needing more freedom to explore different angles and shooting heights, and find tripods limiting in terms of finding the best composition. I have the very fortunate gift of being able to keep horizons and lines straight in the viewfinder, so maybe this lens and I will make great partners

Mack, given your outdoors focus this lens does appear to make more sense for you than the 16-35 II. I think the extra sharpness and smaller size will be more useful than f/2.8.

I am definitely holding onto my 16-35 II, however. I want a UWA for events and sometimes f/2.8 is even too slow, so an f/4 lens is basically out of the question. I have a 24L, but it does not do 16mm or have the flexibility of the 16-35. I am skeptical Canon can make a 16-35 f/2.8 that is massively better than the II without making the lens much larger. Looking at other lenses available, I do not see any that exist that have better IQ at f/2.8 and a similar zoom range without much, much larger size and weight.

This does give me a good idea for a survey, though

Ruined, I completely understand and used to use my Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 a lot when I shot events, but my work has shifted away from that and stopping subject movement is less important to me these days. The 16-35 II is a great lens in many ways because it's a really nice range of focal lengths, takes filters, is f/2.8, and built like a tank. I was hoping for a 16-35 f/2.8 III with better corners and CA correction, or at least that in a similar zoom range and with f/2.8. That didn't happen, at least yet, so I took a step back to evaluate the shooting I actually do, versus what I have done and after thinking it through, this new lens seems like a good fit for me. I love fast lenses so I'm sure part of me will miss the f/2.8, but I think f/4 will work for me in 95% of the things I use the f/2.8 for these days.

 

[Duff]

Hello guys, new member here (currently a Nikon DX user, flirting with Canon FF)

Anyone (esp. MrPhotoEditor) having any info how this lens performs in infrared? The 17-40 did an okay job but the 16-35f/2.8II had a bad hotspot which made it worthless for an infrared shooter like me.

 

[Snodge]

Hello guys, new member here (currently a Nikon DX user, flirting with Canon FF)

Anyone (esp. MrPhotoEditor) having any info how this lens performs in infrared? The 17-40 did an okay job but the 16-35f/2.8II had a bad hotspot which made it worthless for an infrared shooter like me.

I'd be interested to know this too, I've been using m42 lenses to get around this issue...

 

[candyman]

Hello guys, new member here (currently a Nikon DX user, flirting with Canon FF)

Anyone (esp. MrPhotoEditor) having any info how this lens performs in infrared? The 17-40 did an okay job but the 16-35f/2.8II had a bad hotspot which made it worthless for an infrared shooter like me.

I'd be interested to know this too, I've been using m42 lenses to get around this issue...

Graham Clark Photography is planning to review the Canon 16-35 f/4 IS as soon as he will get his hands on it. I asked him to review on a few aspects and that includes the infrared. He confirmed that he will review the performance while using it with infrared. Now it is just a matter of time to wait for the review.

 

[MrPhotoEditor]

Hello guys, new member here (currently a Nikon DX user, flirting with Canon FF)

Anyone (esp. MrPhotoEditor) having any info how this lens performs in infrared? The 17-40 did an okay job but the 16-35f/2.8II had a bad hotspot which made it worthless for an infrared shooter like me.

sorry Duff, don't have a converted body to test it on (yet)...

 

[ouuzi]

What about the sun stars ,are they in the same league as the 2.8?Mrphotoeditor?

 

[MrPhotoEditor]

What about the sun stars ,are they in the same league as the 2.8?Mrphotoeditor?

haven't compare them side by side, but I'm perfectly satisfied from what the f/4L gave me.

 

[apacheebest]

Waiting for more sample images specially Landscapes and reviews, this is my next buy Lens if reviews are positive

But this lens is still not listed in Australia, India and many countries yet but available only in USA and China till now that too Preorder. how much more time Canon will take ?? Maybe months ?

Even a decent video is missing in You tube till now except this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4AgQICZ-JE

Anil George

 

[Ruined]

What about the sun stars ,are they in the same league as the 2.8?Mrphotoeditor?

Well, looking at the specs this lens will deliver an 18-point sunstar, similar to the 24-70 II.

The 16-35 II f/2.8 delivers a 14-point sunstar.

Personally, I like the look of a 14-point sunstar better than an 18-point sunstar; the 14-point just looks more natural/artistically pleasing to me and the best balance of # of rays/space in between rays. 18-point actually looks a bit cartoonish to me. But, this will likely boil down to personal preference.

Here is an example of 18-point sunstar: http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Spencer.jpg

And here is a 14-point sunstar: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YmWPW66rZ-o/UFsuV3tT9SI/AAAAAAAAAHQ/tMBjzehnwKg/s1600/IMG_2994_blog.jpg

 

[EatingPie]

What about the sun stars ,are they in the same league as the 2.8?Mrphotoeditor?

Well, looking at the specs this lens will deliver an 18-point sunstar, similar to the 24-70 II.

The 16-35 II f/2.8 delivers a 14-point sunstar.

Personally, I like the look of a 14-point sunstar better than an 18-point sunstar; the 14-point just looks more natural/artistically pleasing to me and the best balance of # of rays/space in between rays. 18-point actually looks a bit cartoonish to me. But, this will likely boil down to personal preference.

Here is an example of 18-point sunstar: http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Spencer.jpg

And here is a 14-point sunstar: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YmWPW66rZ-o/UFsuV3tT9SI/AAAAAAAAAHQ/tMBjzehnwKg/s1600/IMG_2994_blog.jpg

You actually found something for me to like about the 16-35 II f/2.8?? Darn you! My history with that lens and a 7D are all bad news, but both led to my 5DII, and lots and lots of fun and extremely satisfying photo sessions.

The MTF charts on this new lens look great. If it lives up to the lines, it'll outshine the its f/2.8 sibling (Amen to that!), and is very much on par with the highly regarded 24-70mm f/2.8L II.

-Pie

 

[brad-man]

I have had this lens on preorder direct from Canon since the middle of may, scheduled to ship on 6-27-14. I just received a notice from them that started out with "We regret to inform you that here has been a change in the Estimated Ship Date" and expected a disappointment. To my complete surprise, the estimated ship date has been moved SOONER to 6-20-14. I just thought I'd throw that out there for those who are anticipating this lens as much as I am.

 

[Ruined]

The MTF charts on this new lens look great. If it lives up to the lines, it'll outshine the its f/2.8 sibling (Amen to that!), and is very much on par with the highly regarded 24-70mm f/2.8L II.

-Pie

It will outshine the f/2.8 II in sharpness, but for me it is still a non-starter due to the f/4 aperture. That aperture is great for landscapes but for events it is not fast enough. So for me despite the 16-35 f/2.8L II being less sharp, I am keeping it for the f/2.8 aperture.

 

[Random Orbits]

I have had this lens on preorder direct from Canon since the middle of may, scheduled to ship on 6-27-14. I just received a notice from them that started out with "We regret to inform you that here has been a change in the Estimated Ship Date" and expected a disappointment. To my complete surprise, the estimated ship date has been moved SOONER to 6-20-14. I just thought I'd throw that out there for those who are anticipating this lens as much as I am.

I got the same notice. I was hoping to get the lens before a vacation starting on 6/21, but I won't get it if they ship on 6/20. Bummer!

 

[brad-man]

I have had this lens on preorder direct from Canon since the middle of may, scheduled to ship on 6-27-14. I just received a notice from them that started out with "We regret to inform you that here has been a change in the Estimated Ship Date" and expected a disappointment. To my complete surprise, the estimated ship date has been moved SOONER to 6-20-14. I just thought I'd throw that out there for those who are anticipating this lens as much as I am.

I got the same notice. I was hoping to get the lens before a vacation starting on 6/21, but I won't get it if they ship on 6/20. Bummer!

That does suck. Look at the bright side. We'll definitely have them by the fourth of July!