1. OCAU Merchandise now available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion here.
    Dismiss Notice

Canon 16-35 F4 IS

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by FranchiseJuan, Jun 27, 2014.

  1. FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    I don’t normally go and rush out and preorder the new thing when it just comes out. I usually wait for others to get it and test it all out. But when Canon announced this lens I just could not resist, as I could get it at a great price. Also I wished and hoped for Canon to put out a wide angle zoom with IS and good IQ for while a while, and I needed to put my money where my mouth is.

    [​IMG]

    I use the IS more than F2.8 at the wider angles, as If I need more light, I usually use my 35 F1.4 and take a step back.

    So what is it like? Well I just got it today, and only had a few hours with it, but so far so good. Here it is next to the 16-35 F2.8 II.

    [​IMG]

    It is actually lighter than you might think for something that is a bit longer and larger than the 16-35 F2.8 II. The lens hood is MUCH smaller, and it fits into my shooting bag much better. Build quality is every bit as good as the 2.8. One huge benefit for me is that it uses 77 mm filters instead of the 82 of the 2.8 so I can use the same filters on all my lenses. LOVE THAT!!!

    Here is a quick test. 5D Mark III, ISO 640, 16mm, F8.0, 1/160. Handheld with IS on.

    [​IMG]

    Center Crop:

    [​IMG]

    Corner crop:

    [​IMG]

    I think It looks pretty good so far. From what I can see CA seems to be pretty well controlled as well.

    Weather permitting I will probably go for a walk around the city on the weekend to test it out a bit more. If you are in Melb, and want to come along feel free to PM me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2014
  2. icontact

    icontact Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2005
    Messages:
    208
    Location:
    Sydney
    Your settings doesn't really demonstrate the IS capability of the lens shooting at 1/160th with ISO640 @16mm Handheld. Unless that wasn't really the point of your test. Is it?
     
  3. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    You would be right in saying that IS was not the point of this test. I included all the settings I used in case anyone was interested. My point was that in my initial testing the lens is as sharp in the centre as it is in the corners. As the light was fading fast, I did not really have time to do any controlled testing outside on a tripod today. I took a few photos to see how the lens is.
     
  4. lionman

    lionman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    2,880
    Location:
    Perth,WA,Earth
    16mm with IS you should almost be able to hand hold at 1sec+.

    You don't need a tripod to test out IS ;)
     
  5. icontact

    icontact Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2005
    Messages:
    208
    Location:
    Sydney
    Fair enough sir! When you have another testing session, I would like to see how it performs at slowest shutter speed where it still remains acceptably sharp. Thank you for your time in posting your review.
     
  6. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    This is something I will be testing over the weekend. If it turns out to be indeed true that I can handhold at 1s, I would say that this lens would be worth every last cent.

    Yeah I will be testing the IS much more extensively over the weekend, and also test to see how this lens performs in my normal usage. This combined with the ISO performance of the 5D3 might make shooting night cityscapes much more fun!

    Also this is not so much a review, as a first look. Look for a much more extensive review coming up once I have lived with this lens for a week or so.
     
  7. lionman

    lionman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    2,880
    Location:
    Perth,WA,Earth
    Yeah would be sweet.

    Going by the 1/f rule you should get 1s shots if the IS offers 4 stops of stabilisation claimed by Canon.

    I would say half a second is probably more realistic though for regular sharp results.

    Depends on how steady you are in the end too. Dont drink too much/little coffee...
     
  8. TwinII

    TwinII Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,474
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Maybe it is my poor technique but I have only ever felt I can hand hold 1 extra stop with IS on...and even that is sometimes not that sharp.
     
  9. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    With my 24-105 at the wide end, I am comfortably get an extra 2 stops in most situations (e.g. in a dark church). That is probably partly due to me being so used to that lens.

    With 70-200s, I mostly need the IS to keep the image steady (at the long end). Maybe I have the shakes.... :lol:
     
  10. TwinII

    TwinII Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,474
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I must be more shaky than you!
     
  11. Nafe

    Nafe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,064
    Location:
    North Shore, Sydney
    I tried 0.5s with mine and it was 50:50 as to it coming out sharp. 1/4 is no problem though. Albeit my technique for long shutters like that is pretty sucky :D
     
  12. [kane]

    [kane] Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,096
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Who needs IS with the ISO/NR power in the 1Dx etc.
     
  13. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    One reason is the exposure bracketing in HDR the slowest shutter speed one for me is almost always a little blurry if I am using a lens without IS. Yes I could use a higher ISO, but I would rather use a lower one if I can.

    Though I must admit that during normal usage today I had to manually limit the Auto ISO setting on the camera to get the shutter speed down low enough for the IS to really matter.

    What I will say after a day of shooting is that this lens pretty much uniformly sharp across the frame in my normal working aperture range (F5.6-10). Quite happy so far.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2014
  14. Pinkeh

    Pinkeh Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,122
    Location:
    Sydney
    how is distortion?
     
  15. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    You can see in the picture in the first post (it is not corrected for distortion). I would say generally it is pretty good considering it is an ultra wide.
     
  16. Battlemantis

    Battlemantis Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2014
    Messages:
    5
    Thanks for sharing, would be keen to see more tests and further photo's.
     
  17. smorter

    smorter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    431
    Location:
    Melbourne, AU
    Thanks for sharing I'm very interested in this lens! I need something decent to replace 24-105L for hikes/trips etc.
     
  18. OP
    OP
    FranchiseJuan

    FranchiseJuan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    Location:
    Somewhere Exotic
    While what I have seen is that it is better in the same range than the 24-105, it is not smaller or lighter. I will say though that I love my 24-105, and you can pry it from my cold dead fingers. (Now that I have said that, Canon will do a new version later this year and I will have to sell it.... ;))
     
  19. splbound

    splbound Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    538
    Location:
    London / Sydney
    Thanks for sharing :thumbup:. Damn this lens is very tempting, results show that it will compliment my mkii lenses very well.
    Only thing giving me second thoughts on purchasing the 16-35 IS for my 5D3 is that I purchased an 11-22 EF-M. That lens on the EOS-M is fantastic.

    Either way I am selling my 17-40 now before it drops in resale value more from all the people upgrading.

    I will most probably end up with the 16-35 IS, it's just a matter of time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2014
  20. a1ring23

    a1ring23 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2010
    Messages:
    240
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia.
    Did anyone manage to get one from digidirect when they had their 10% off sale? Can you tell me how much it was?
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: