I am an ambitious amateur photographer. As a camera, I use a Canon 100D, which I guess not only as a travel camera due to the small, compact dimensions. She is well known, an APS-C sensor. Already very good experience I did with the Canon 100mm 2.8 L IS USM Macro, which was indeed designed for full frame. Excellent sharpness and brilliant contrast in the macro range of the 100D body. From 3 meters away but clearly waning and then upwards only in middle class area - ok, just a macro lens. Due to the high quality so I decided after long research for the acquisition of 16-35mm from the L-class. A series of test shots in a direct comparison with the kit lens the 100D, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STM should then convince me out of the box. That is probably not a problem, I thought. I tested different focal lengths with different apertures in bright light in the outdoor area in the late afternoon. Some comparison shots indoors with and without flash completed the test series. The astonishment at the PC was then very large! In no area is the expensive 16-35mm L could settle. On the contrary: The sharpness was recognized as bad on closer inspection even without zooming. Contrast and color reproduction a bit complacent. Could this be? My thoughts were on the subject of "manufacturing outliers" (Monday production). The lens went back again. But since I now wanted to know exactly, I ordered (now at Amazon) again the 16-35mm L. very excited I made right after the delivery back comparison shots (again with the kit lens 18-55mm). The lighting conditions were good again (late afternoon sun). The results amazing: The picture quality / sharpness of the new 16-35 L was now little better. There are so yet - the manufacturing tolerances in the L-class. But now to the direct comparison: Even now, I could only a small visible advantage compared to the kit lens with little shots - often -Recognize only after zooming in. The contrast and the color reproduction of the L-lens were a little more comfortable, sophisticated and brilliant in some shots. Many direct comparison shots but I could not make unambiguous assignment on the PC without the image information.
Conclusion: The 16-35mm L brings me to the APS-C sensor compared to the kit lens Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STM not continuously visible improvements in the shots. Too bad, because the manufacturing quality / design and operation of the L-lens are of course very well and impressed me positively. The kit lens you get currently new for about 139, - ...............
