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 have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.

OK, I confirm

You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept Cookies

Customize

Refuse Cookies

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM II : Specifications and Opinions

The Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM II is a wide-angle lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2007 to 2016 (discontinued). 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 1419 €;

99 users have given it an average vote of 8.6 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.

Specifications
Focal lenght	16-35 mm
Angle of view	107.1 - 63.5°
Format	FF, APS-C
Max. aperture	f/2.8
Aperture blades	7
Lenses/Groups	16 elements in 12 groups
Min. focus distance	0.28 meters
Reproduction ratio	0.22x
Features
Zoom type	Ring, interal
Stabilization	No
Focus	Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM)
Internal AF	Yes
Full Time MF	Yes
Built and notes
Tripod ring	No
Extenders	No
Filters	82 mm
Lens hood	Yes, supplied
Weather sealing	Yes
Weight	635 g
Dimensions	89 x 112 mm
Buy
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM II, buy on Ebay

Reviews

What do you think about this lens?

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 220000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

DiegoD

sent on August 27, 2019

Pros: Bright, f2.8 row resistance and tropicalization

Cons: Size

Opinion: Of this lens I have heard of each: it is pasty is inaccurate distorts a lot, the brother f4 is much better... etc. I have had it and loved it for many years for the following reasons: I love industrial photography and therefore I have often found myself shooting in the dark, I love the landscape and I love the Street, especially at night. I tried brother is f4, beautiful lens for charity, but it was not for me, sharp almost to be cold stabilized very well, but f2.8 are f2.8. I never regretted the absence of the stabilizer, indeed in the landscapes I always mounted the filter nd. In the night street from the best, of course it must be used as any 16-35, it is not a 35 tip and snaps... the leaks of the lines are obvious and if you can't keep the car in axis the result is merciless... but if you study and learn the rules, that lens is a joy. I think this is a lens not for newtors, buy the 17-40 or the f4 and you will have more fun! But if you want a true backlight rose you can't ask for better, in fact you... going on its version 3 or on Zeiss. Used must buy.

Ziojack

sent on January 18, 2017

Pros: L series, weather sealed, f 2.8

Cons: .....Nothing for now.

Opinion: Lens taken in lieu of the same focal length, but version f4 usm is ii.rnHo did an exchange with a member of the forum, he was looking for a wide angle and I is a bright wide angle .... rnrnPrime impressions: rnrnEsteticamente the optic has an imposing front lens (filter 82mm) making it firm and stable grip the lens giving you a sense of sicurezza.rnRifiniture L. Curated series and well finished, although the project is now the 2007.rnrnPer regarding the yield, both of 6d 80d that are currently satisfied. rnL'apertura f 2.8 makes file is good for night use as indoors or outdoors and does not feel the lack of stabilizer. rnGlobalmente I have not seen it with photos edges too mixed or unclear let alone bui.rnCerto to 16 mm c is a slight vignetting but not ecessiva, as a slight ghosting if you point directly to a light source, it is the sun or a artificiale.rnrnSoddisfatto light. rnrn rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn

Beppe Cavalleri

sent on December 28, 2015

Pros: Focal range and aperture 2.8

Cons: Total yield, poor sharpness especially at the edges, not af precise.

Opinion: I think it is, in my opinion, among the worst Canon lenses. To be a wide optical flaw in many important aspects mainly on clarity and consistency of the same clarity on the frame. Perhaps retains a certain decency in photojournalism, but otherwise in my opinion not worth what it costs. I hope for a version III arranged for the type of optics is very interesting!

Maushoot

sent on October 23, 2015

Pros: construction, manageability, speed AF, brightness

Cons: edges pasty wide openings, light flare and aberrations in extreme conditions, the price more than double the 17-40mm f4

Opinion: I am more and more for the practical tests on the ground that the empirical laboratory of focus chart that will not fully apply in realtà.rnrnLente obviously suitable for both outdoor and indoor scenic shots for its luminosity (churches, aisles, interior architectural structures etc. .). rnDa definitely his best on FF though on APS-C also find a more suitable area of ??applicazione.rnrnDistorsione important to 16mm but sometimes it can just be desired and sought and can make it more "exciting" shots. rnViceversa TA f2.8 edges are very mellow and of limited use for example in size prints generose.rnHo noticed in extreme conditions (see the sun inside the lens) a major flare and aberrations a little 'fastidiose.rnrnLo consider it a bit' brother of the more economical 17-40 f4 L which is slightly more flexible since giving up just one strand of wide-angle, earns less than 5 mm focal length lunga.rnNon very much agree with the policyCanon to provide a 16-35mm that would then assisted to a 24-70 or 24-105, so you would purchase a very expensive lens that is going to overlap for most of the standard zoom focal above (see Nikon also offers 12-14), for example the quality of the 24-70 2.8 L series II between 24 and 35mm is also superior to that of the 16-35mm.rnD'altronde the Canon 11-24mm is still unapproachable for standard budget! rnrnPuò be also suitable for tight portraits if you want a fun "creative distortion", or 30-35mm for portraits ambientati.rnResta to understand whether it is worth compared to 17-40, having used both on 5D MIII bearing very good high speed ISO, I have to say that this camera body today is not worth investing about 900 euro more for more light but this will be offset by the technical capabilities of macchina.rnDiscorso different on other versions of FF that would benefit much more of the steps of brightness that has compared to the 16-35mm17-40mm.rnC'è also to say that in comparing the two (because this is also practical) 17-40 is easily used to 400 euro, while the 16-35 to no less than 900, and then in the proportion gap in price between the two widens even più.rnrnIn substance, worth it? RNA my opinion depends on the type of photos you like best and make the kit you have. So if you are very fond of panoramic photos taken around 18-20mm and these are the majority of those we do then 16-35 is the right lens because the image quality is superior to these focal compared to 17-40. rnTuttavia if these are not primarily our photos and you also own the 24-70 series 2.8 L II then in my opinion you should have one lens over 1000 Euros for "only" 8 mm more grandangolo.rnCiao at all.

Stec81

sent on July 26, 2015

Pros: Clarity, versatility, contrast, color, construction, auto focus.

Cons: Edges apertures, distortion at short focal lengths.

Opinion: 16-35 This is a lens that I love, it has its flaws ... like some sharpness at the edges at the widest apertures and noticeable distortion with very short focal ... so definitely not a perfect lens, for those who love landscapes recommend the new f4 IS. On the other hand, however, also it has many strengths, excellent sharpness in the center and in the intermediate zones, focal very versatile, color rendering and contrast very good. The building is at the top, a tank ... and the auto focus is precise and immediate ... at last, a bright aperture. A goal born to reports and photojournalism sports and not, for these types is perfect without a doubt. I use it with satisfaction also during weddings and photographs style of architecture, interiors and landscapes, with a little 'of foresight and knowing the limits, you can take home excellent work in these fields, so I recommend it to big. When I needed to replace it, I was a bit 'undecided between this and the new f4 IS, I eventuallyI chose this again, mainly for the need of a diaphragm bright ... choice of which absolutely do not regret.

There are 17 more reviews. Show all »

Photos taken with Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM II

Clouds, the Milky Way and Aurora Borealis, 016499

by Juza
114 comments, 53174 views

Sunrise and sunset

by Juza
101 comments, 37542 views

I do not play more .. burma

by Alessandro Bergamini
193 comments, 37071 views [editors pick]

Untitled Photo

by Mayda
120 comments, 24688 views [editors pick]

Ice and fire

by Juza
58 comments, 19778 views

You come in?

by Anthony Pappone
122 comments, 32221 views [editors pick]

Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info)

Aurora Grundarfjordur

by Juza
79 comments, 21885 views

Aurora Borealis of 01/12/2014

by Juza
92 comments, 19444 views

Electrauto in the Serengeti

by Fabio Maccagno
129 comments, 13361 views

Sunrise reflected, 016,422

by Juza
86 comments, 22791 views

Pull Me Under

by Mauro Tronto
87 comments, 12841 views [editors pick]

Antelope Canyon

by Diego-v-73
189 comments, 30529 views [editors pick]

Full Moon

by Sistuccio
115 comments, 20598 views

Kirkjufell reflection

by Juza
68 comments, 15723 views

Stockness dawn

by Juza
39 comments, 13607 views

Welcome property

by Erik Colombo Photographer
95 comments, 5246 views [editors pick]

HI RES 37.7 MP

An icy world

by Juza
44 comments, 11870 views

One Vision

by Tommy
86 comments, 11899 views [editors pick]

Escape routes ...

by Shiko
166 comments, 23115 views [editors pick]

Sunset frozen

by Juza
56 comments, 12493 views

St. Mark's Square Basin

by Sabbion
47 comments, 5695 views [editors pick]

HI RES 10.7 MP

The flood of the Po

by Nangi
111 comments, 4411 views

HI RES 5.4 MP

Down there among the flowers

by Jessy68
201 comments, 16463 views

HI RES 3.8 MP

The larch

by Sistuccio
84 comments, 15506 views

Aurora Borealis, Norway, 2013, 016 374

by Juza
72 comments, 38527 views

Spirals in the sky

by Juza
34 comments, 12675 views

Dubai view from above

by Filtro
95 comments, 17673 views [editors pick]

The artist of the painting

by Anthony Pappone
62 comments, 17805 views [editors pick]

Kirkjufell

by Nicoruffato
85 comments, 5136 views

Alba Vik, Iceland

by Juza
36 comments, 10410 views

Mesa Arch

by Shiko
105 comments, 15392 views [editors pick]

The magic of the dawn

by Juza
40 comments, 10556 views

7 Seconds Away

by Mauro Tronto
51 comments, 4244 views

The stone Harlequin

by Sistuccio
114 comments, 13090 views

Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info)

Ice Jokulsarlon

by Juza
26 comments, 11184 views

The reflection of the aurora borealis

by Massimo Coizzi Fotografia
83 comments, 9023 views

Sunset

by Sistuccio
105 comments, 14443 views

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.

Reviews » Lenses » Lenses Canon » Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM II