Is the 16-35 L II worth its price?

[Dylan777]

The sunstars with the 16-35 are among the best I've ever seen on any lens.

You should see the sun stars on the 24-70ii, if that's the case (if you haven't already). At f8 they're remarkable.

Mid afternoon. crop nearly 60%. 5D III + 24-70 II F7

 

[Click]

Mid afternoon. crop nearly 60%. 5D III + 24-70 II F7

That's a great shot. I like the angle that you took this shot.

 

[davidrf]

Hey, could someone please help me determine the production date of this lens? It's the 16-35L II I'm about to buy used, but I can't figure how to read the code:

link: http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/697/mg0012w.jpg

Thanks a lot!

 

[iMagic]

Hey, could someone please help me determine the production date of this lens? It's the 16-35L II I'm about to buy used, but I can't figure how to read the code:

link: http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/697/mg0012w.jpg

Thanks a lot!

Google. Canon lens date code and select the first hit.

 

[Raddy]

Hey, could someone please help me determine the production date of this lens? It's the 16-35L II I'm about to buy used, but I can't figure how to read the code:

link: http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/697/mg0012w.jpg

Thanks a lot!

Seems the date code on this lens is: UA0810 (?)

According to http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx this lens was produced August 2012 or even 1986. ;-)

 

[davidrf]

I googled but a bunch of pages I found were confusing. On the Digital-Picture page everything is clearer...

thanks a lot, so it's a 2012

 

[wayno]

Speaking again of sunstars/starbursts, I've always liked the tight glow of the 17-40 f8 stars and whilst the 24-70 II f8 stars look amazing, they're very, very distinctive and tend to stick out of an image more than the atmospheric glow exhibuted by the 17-40. Coming from a 10-22 originally, the starbursts on that we're quite messy in comparison to both of the above, with the bursts usually accompanied by dollops of off-centre flare and sometimes specular mini flares.

 

[davidrf]

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jzpwm62lnja0gqk/ocWBSZ3UgF/_MG_0014.cr2
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jzpwm62lnja0gqk/m7g_93WQbF/_MG_0015.cr2

Could someone please download these two raws and thell me what you think about it? They are shot with a 5D mk2. Is it me or there's a bit much softness on the borders, and a strange noise that at 200 ISO should not be there? Thanks a lot!

 

[dirtcastle]

Speaking again of sunstars/starbursts, I've always liked the tight glow of the 17-40 f8 stars and whilst the 24-70 II f8 stars look amazing, they're very, very distinctive and tend to stick out of an image more than the atmospheric glow exhibuted by the 17-40. Coming from a 10-22 originally, the starbursts on that we're quite messy in comparison to both of the above, with the bursts usually accompanied by dollops of off-centre flare and sometimes specular mini flares.

To each his/her own. I find the stars distracting and the only way to reduce them is to open up the aperture. I think people like them for the same reason people like heart-shaped bokeh: novelty.

 

[GoodVendettaPhotography]

The short answer is: no.