Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Special Offer
You can buy Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens today at the best price and it's limited time offer. Look at our special deals today on our store. Get more and spend less when you buy Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens. Also read our Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens reviews before you decide to buy Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens. Anything you have to know about this item, More about this
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Reviews
Many customers was gave reviews and ratings to Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens. If you want to read those detail to make your decision on this product just CLICK HERE
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Overview:
- 16-35mm ultra-wide-angle zoom lens with f/2.8 maximum aperture
- 3 high-precision aspherical lens elements produce superior image quality
- Circular aperture produces natural background blur at wider apertures
- Ring-type USM for fast and quiet autofocusing; internal focusing
- Measures 3.5 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long; 1-year warranty
- Measures 3.5 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long , 1-year warranty
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Reviews, On Sale Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens, buy Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens, Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens best buy, Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Discount, Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens For Sale
The Best Contact Lens King The Best LCD HDTV The Best Nikon Lens
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens Reviews
145 of 150 people found the following review helpful: 
Modest improvement mostly for full frame users, January 6, 2008 By George (Salt Lake City, Utah) - See all my reviews This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) I have owned both this and the original version. The new lens is better in the corners and flares less but the corners are still a little soft at f2.8 and you can get the lens to flare a little if you try. I haven't seen the loss of clarity above 20mm that others reported. Perhaps you would see a slight difference in eyelashes if you did a lot of portraits but this is probably not the best choice for a portrait lens. It is a somewhat better lens for shooting landscapes and other shots where edge to edge clarity is important.
But the differences between the two versions are minor and in some instances irrelevant. If you don't shoot a full frame camera the soft edges don't appear in the photo. And flare is a minimal issue at most. It rarely appears and is easy to fix in Photoshop if it does. I would opt for the original if I didn't shoot full frame based on the price difference alone.
My only problem with the original was when I had to shoot hand held... Read more
88 of 92 people found the following review helpful: Going on vacation?, February 10, 2009 By This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) Many people have stated the facts about this lens. Instead of restating them, let me add what I use it for:
For nature photography, this is the only lens I need. Just put something pretty in the foreground (flowers, rocks, etc.) and let the lens magically stretch out the horizon to add drama and flair to the shot. Makes beaches MAGICAL... Makes forests imposing. Adds desolation to the desert.
And from a business perspective:
As a wedding shooter, I use it to stretch out small/boring churches and make them more dramatic. It is also great to use from above for dancefloor shots and really makes the shots DYNAMIC and interesting.
And finally:
If you are deciding between this and the 17-40, let me save you some time... there is a huge difference between 16mm and 17mm. Don't waste time buying the 17 and then selling it at a loss to upgrade like I did.
If you're going to go wide.. go wide baby. ;)
272 of 308 people found the following review helpful: 
Better at 16, but goes soft after 24mm, May 15, 2007 By This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) UPDATE: Since posting this review, I have done further experimentation and am coming to a conclusion (no new info from Canon thus far) that (in addition to this lens's gaussian factor) this new version is just more difficult for current camera bodies to focus, which is probably 70 percent of the problem that I'm seeing. Since this was released for the new 1DmIII camera body, we can hope that the 19 enhanced cross-type sensors will handle this lens better than current bodies. I am leaving the rest of the review as written, because the tradeoff against the long end is real, as is the gaussian effect beyond 24mm relative to the original version. Also because it accuratley reflects how others will encounter this same phenomenon. Based on this, I would up my star rating to 3.5 if they had decimals.... Also: Would like to clarify my remark below about it cleaning up the corners as advertised. I mean that remark to apply to the 16-20mm range only, because at 24mm I have a test shot showing a... Read more
› See all 84 customer reviews...
| 145 of 150 people found the following review helpful: Modest improvement mostly for full frame users, By George (Salt Lake City, Utah) - See all my reviews This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) I have owned both this and the original version. The new lens is better in the corners and flares less but the corners are still a little soft at f2.8 and you can get the lens to flare a little if you try. I haven't seen the loss of clarity above 20mm that others reported. Perhaps you would see a slight difference in eyelashes if you did a lot of portraits but this is probably not the best choice for a portrait lens. It is a somewhat better lens for shooting landscapes and other shots where edge to edge clarity is important.But the differences between the two versions are minor and in some instances irrelevant. If you don't shoot a full frame camera the soft edges don't appear in the photo. And flare is a minimal issue at most. It rarely appears and is easy to fix in Photoshop if it does. I would opt for the original if I didn't shoot full frame based on the price difference alone. My only problem with the original was when I had to shoot hand held... Read more 88 of 92 people found the following review helpful: Going on vacation?, By This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) Many people have stated the facts about this lens. Instead of restating them, let me add what I use it for:For nature photography, this is the only lens I need. Just put something pretty in the foreground (flowers, rocks, etc.) and let the lens magically stretch out the horizon to add drama and flair to the shot. Makes beaches MAGICAL... Makes forests imposing. Adds desolation to the desert. And from a business perspective: As a wedding shooter, I use it to stretch out small/boring churches and make them more dramatic. It is also great to use from above for dancefloor shots and really makes the shots DYNAMIC and interesting. And finally: If you are deciding between this and the 17-40, let me save you some time... there is a huge difference between 16mm and 17mm. Don't waste time buying the 17 and then selling it at a loss to upgrade like I did. If you're going to go wide.. go wide baby. ;) 272 of 308 people found the following review helpful: Better at 16, but goes soft after 24mm, By This review is from: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens (Camera) UPDATE: Since posting this review, I have done further experimentation and am coming to a conclusion (no new info from Canon thus far) that (in addition to this lens's gaussian factor) this new version is just more difficult for current camera bodies to focus, which is probably 70 percent of the problem that I'm seeing. Since this was released for the new 1DmIII camera body, we can hope that the 19 enhanced cross-type sensors will handle this lens better than current bodies. I am leaving the rest of the review as written, because the tradeoff against the long end is real, as is the gaussian effect beyond 24mm relative to the original version. Also because it accuratley reflects how others will encounter this same phenomenon. Based on this, I would up my star rating to 3.5 if they had decimals.... Also: Would like to clarify my remark below about it cleaning up the corners as advertised. I mean that remark to apply to the 16-20mm range only, because at 24mm I have a test shot showing a... Read more |
› See all 84 customer reviews...
