JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III USM is a wide-angle lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2016. The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it does not have image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 2029 €;
22 users have given it an average vote of 9.3 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Canon EF.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 200000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
Opinion: Nothing is complete, Best image quality I've seen + one of the biggest wide lenses I've seen. Overall I am happy with the results, even sharper than 16-35 F4L IS!!But the SIZE and maybe the price makes it a hard choice for most. However, I do really wonder why there is not any 15mm, 16mm, 17mm, 18mm small prime lens from canon! 14mm is too wide for my taste and 20mm is not as wide as I want; a 4mm of FL range but an extensive difference. for now I am going to stick to the Zeiss 18mm f3.5 which is wide, and small.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:sharpness, brightness, edge yield, contrast and micro contrast, tropicalization, sturdiness, high build quality.
Cons:Price
Opinion:Before him I had the EF 16-35mm f/4l IS USM and later the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD. This Canon is superior to both without a shadow of a doubt. In my personal ranking is positioned at the top staccato little from the Tamron while farther you place the 16-35 F/4 that Pecca, compared to the first two of less sharpness. Nothing dramatic, but the Tamron and the 16-35 f/2.8 III are really very sharp. The difference between the two is that the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III USM is always sharp, from 16 to 35, from the center to the edges and even at full aperture. The Tamron does not have sharp edges like the Canon and from 22-24 onwards it deteriorates altogether its performance. In short, this lens is fabulous, it returns you some files that look alive, three-dimensional, with a total yield impossible for the excellent Tamron pur (which I repeat to be an excellent lens) and with an embarrassing sharpness. Rightly the question that is often addressed is whether it is compared to brother F/4 since it costs twice as much. Is this price difference really worth it? For me yes, especially if you have a camera with many pixels that enhance this lens.
Pros:Sharpness | F/2.8 | L Series | Colors | Contrast | tropicalization | Build quality.
Cons:None worthy of note.
Opinion:I state that photographer mainly in weddings and events, then the light optics are obligatory, the lack of stabilization is not felt in these areas since it is not necessary to freeze the action, maybe for landscapes and similar stuff would have done Comfortable but also you use the tripod. The brightness of this 16-35mm makes it perfect for reportage, a stop in more brightness than the F/4 version means that in low light you have a stop in less than ISO getting cleaner photos, then the rendering of this optic with its colors and Contrast make it a perfect lens for its kind. It is not a cheap and very light lens, it is a professional lens of the L series, therefore the top. For amateurs I recommend the F/4 version much cheaper and with almost equal overall yield plus has the stabilization that can help in certain circumstances, for professionals or advanced amateurs who work at the professional level then this is the lens that makes For you. I didn't get to try the previous version so I can't give opinions about it. I hope this my opinion has been of help, a cordial greeting greeting and good light to all!!! ;)
Opinion:I had the F4 16-35 and last year I switched to the F 2.8 mainly for a speech of brightness (using it a lot, as well as for landscapes, even for photos of reportage and weddings for which the more brightness made me comfortable as well as throat), but if you click Mostly landscape photos I definitely recommend the F4 version. I have not done tests nor ever made and I am interested, but after 3 years of F4 and 1 of f 2.8 III I can say that at the level of sharpness between the two I have not noticed a big difference, indeed.. Surely at F11 I do not think they are recognizable photos made with one or the other lens. Having said that that extra brightness, especially in certain photographic areas, can be really worth it. On the other hand, considering that the f 2.8 costs exactly twice the F4, besides the fact that it weighs more, is more cumbersome and loses the IS, rate really if it agrees this optical or the F4 version, but surely I do not think that the differences are worth twice the Price, which I consider still too high. (I must say that I was amazed at the fact that today there is only a review of this lens, which is probably the best wide angle of the Canon house, there will be some reason...? boh)
Photos taken with Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III USM
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
