Finally a sharp Weitwikelzoom Canon

So far there was not a single Canon wide-angle zoom for full frame, which provides reasonable edge sharpness. Even at the edges of the aperture 8 EF 17-40 f / 4 and the 1400 expensive EF 16-35 f / 2.8 II washy. That just does not work for the price. Although the 2.8er reached a high reputation as a reportage lens because of the good contrast and sharp image center, but was able to because of the terrible edges never convince for Lanschaftsaufnahmen.

In my opinion, the Canon EF 16-35 f / 4 IS wait the lens at the landscape and architectural photographers with Canon Body for many years. It is knackscharf. The center has its maximum sharpness even at full aperture. The edge is already well resolved with diaphragm 4, but again better at f 8. Definitely worlds better than in the previous comparable Canon zoom. In addition, the contrast at all apertures is also excellent. The lens produces crisp images properly.

Other Features:

- The feel is roughly the same as the 24-70 2.8L II and the 100 2.8L Macro, so really good.
- Inner focusing
Pink Creates beautiful sun star with 18 -
- Very little reflexes in backlight
- The lens hood latches fed a (same mechanism as in the 70-200 2.8L II and the 24-70 2.8L II)
- Focus is fast and accurate
- The lens is easily enjoyable
- Image Stabilization works very well and is great for dark interiors without moving objects
- No need for expensive 82mm filter. The lens has a 77mm filter connection.
- The distortions keep the focus range is limited. At 16mm it is easy Barrel, at 35mm easy Pincushion distortion. At 24mm no distortion.
- The lens is similarly sharp at all focal lengths.
- The edges and corners are noticeably better than the EF 24-105 f eg / 4 at the same aperture at all focal lengths..

So far I have not noticed any real blemish on the lens. In my opinion, the lens is currently by far the best ultra-wide angle zoom for Canon photographers who operate seriously landscape and travel photography. In architectural photography, the EF is 17 TSE probably still slightly ahead. But no more because of better illustration, but only because of the possibility of shift.

Aperture freaks, will photograph the weddings still need to consider whether you a 2.8er aperture is more important than the edge sharpness and the lower price and the lower weight. Would a Canon 2.8er offer the same image quality as the f / 4 IS, then the choice would be much easier for all: people and sport photographer with a thick wallet to buy the 2.8er, landscape and travel photographer buy the 4p. Unfortunately, the Canon-world is currently a little more complicated for the first group.