Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II USM VS Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM mounted on Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III : As a Canon user, potential purchasers of this lens will also likely consider the firm’s popular EF 24-105mm f/4L. Both are L-series and targeting professional photographers, however while the 24-70mm f/2.8 is one stop faster (theoretically Sunstars. One of the major selling points in the Canon 16-35mm F2.8L II was the characteristically beautiful sunstar. Over the years it has become one of the most distinguishable and coveted sunstars in the landscape photography; so much so that some have even created photoshop actions to replicate it. has a silent focus motor built into the lens. Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM. Lenses with built-in focus motor focus faster and more quietly than lenses without a focus motor which rely on the camera's body focus motor. minimum focus distance. Not shown here, but the 10-18mm has the same or even less distortion as does the 16-35mm. Ha! I expect that the Canon 16-35mm f/4 L IS should be the first really sharp Canon full-frame ultrawide, but today, a $100 used Rebel with the new $300 10-18mm turns out images about as sharp as the $1,700 16-35mm f/2.8 L II and $3,200 5D Mark III. I just Dw bro, the run down is like this. The 16-35mm f/2.8 ii is not as sharp in the corners as the 16-35mm iii or f/4. F/2.8 will not matter for any of your specific shooting situations but astrophotography. So, having one lens just for astrophotography and another for all your WA stuffs is no big deal. I have also owned that lens and used it for astro. Comparison winner $2,199 vs 33 facts in comparison Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM vs Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM Why is Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM better than Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM? 150g lighter? 640g vs 790g 0.2% less distortion? 0.2% vs 0.4% Scroll down for more details F0eGsw. Canon Ultrawide Lenses Compared (Full-Frame) Canon 20-35 USM, 20-35mm f/2.8 L, 17-40mm f/4 L and 16-35/2.8II. enlarge. Canon 20-35 USM, 20-35 L, 17-35mm, 17-40mm and 16-35mm L II. enlarge. Canon 20/2.8 USM, 17-40/4 L, 16-35/2.8 L II and 16-35/4 L IS. bigger. Canon Ultrawide Lens Sharpness Comparison. The Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM lens is an inexpensive alternative to the 16-35mm f/2.8, but its edges are muddy at its widest angle. It isn't as sharp as the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM COMPATIBLE LENSES. RED tested the following lenses and confirmed the functionality for use with KOMODO-X: RF LENSES. EF LENSES. Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8 L IS USM 1. Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM. Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM 2. Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM. Canon RF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM 3. Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II USM VS Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM mounted on Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III : As a Canon user, potential purchasers of this lens will also likely consider the firm’s popular EF 24-105mm f/4L. Both are L-series and targeting professional photographers, however while the 24-70mm f/2.8 is one stop faster (theoretically Not shown here, but the 10-18mm has the same or even less distortion as does the 16-35mm. Ha! I expect that the Canon 16-35mm f/4 L IS should be the first really sharp Canon full-frame ultrawide, but today, a $100 used Rebel with the new $300 10-18mm turns out images about as sharp as the $1,700 16-35mm f/2.8 L II and $3,200 5D Mark III. I just Has full-time manual focus. Canon EF 200mm F/2L IS USM. Canon EF 300mm F2.8L IS II USM. With full-time manual focus, you can move the focus ring whilst it is in AF (autofocus) mode. This means that you can make manual adjustments once the AF has finished, without changing to manual mode.

canon ef 16 35mm f 2.8 l usm vs ii