Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Ultra Wide Angle Zoom Lens - Refurbished

2019-01-20T19:00:00

Couldn’t tell this was refurb. Nicely packaged. No scratches or damage

Rmoore

Originally posted at

2018-06-29T20:00:00

I purchased this a couple of months ago and it’s performing well.

DCD

Originally posted at

2018-06-16T20:00:00

First trip out with this lens has been everything I hoped it would be. Crisp wide shots in 16mm and a swing to 35 mm for great portiats. Great color and dimensions.

Stickmin

Originally posted at

2018-02-01T19:00:00

Had this on my 1DX mark II on assignment in Hong Kong. Brand New Lens. Placed the camera on a table and noticed the lens coming loose off the base. It had broken off exposing the inside electronics. Very very very poor build quality. I had to switch to my 24-70 2.8 By the end of the trip the same thing started to happen to that lens as well. Super disappointed with the lens quality of these high end lenses.

JackDC

Originally posted at

2017-06-26T20:00:00

This is now my go to lens. I love the sharpness it brings to my image.

RetratoPhotography

Originally posted at

2016-04-23T20:00:00

Nothing negative about this lens, its amazing. Canon equipped it with a cheap flimsy plastic hood, it bends and even gets past the main ring of the lens. Not sturdy enough, the only draw back that keeps on nagging me when I use it. Else, buy it, its a very good lens.

Godb

Originally posted at

2015-09-25T20:00:00

It is hard to expand upon the positive reviews others have said. This lens adds great versatility to the range of pictures I am able to capture. It complements by EF 24-70mm f2.8 that I have used for years. It is well engineered. I have used for family/friends pictures in tight locations inside, as well as landscapes I was never fully able to capture before with my other lens.

Macp

Originally posted at

2015-03-25T20:00:00

I bought this lens for my 5D mark ii and saw some of the issues others have raised. When I moved up to the 5D mark iii a few years ago I have had nothing but spectacular results from it. So if you have the 5D mark iii (or the upcoming hi-res bodies do yourself a favor and buy it. If you have a different camera body I would save some money (and weight) and get the new f4 which is also a wonderful lens.

Vinnie

Originally posted at

2015-01-21T19:00:00

The good: lens is very sharp for a zoom. Of my 6 L lenses, I use this one the most. The bad: mine is going in for repair for the 3rd time. The bayonet plastic is too weak for this heavy of a lens. All 3 incidents occurred while the lens was attached to the camera. None of the occurrences were high impact.

PJ

Originally posted at

2014-09-10T20:00:00

This is the third time i try to make a review. Honestly i don't understand why do you reject. Anyhow let talk a bit about this lens. I got a brand new lens, and i think it is defected and not sharp at all. Today i tried to take a long exposure picture on a tripod and even that didnt help with the sharpness at all. I've read lot of people having problem with this lens but couldn't believe it until i use it. I'm so disappointed that i don't know whether to make an effort to return it to canon or not. Really im not happy. I spend lots of money and loved this lens because it was my first L lens. Yes it is my first L lens. So what? I cannot force anyone to buy it or avoid it, what i can tell is that this L lens is not at the same level to prove that belongs to the L family. But who am i to say that? Good luck. P.S. I'm going to copy this message and make a screen shot as well. So in case you reject it i will upload the image to all the internet reviews. I very unhappy and very disappointed.

Leonardo

Originally posted at

2014-03-31T20:00:00

I have used this lens for almost four years. With the understanding that objects at the edges will have wide angle distortion. This lens is a "professional performer." It produces images that sell and please the most discriminate... excellent color, contrast, sharpness... Canon engineers have created a lens that can exaggerate or render true the images you are capturing. I highly recommend this lens for the novice or skilled professional. Well worth the money spent. A precision image capturing instrument.

Crosswind

Originally posted at

2014-03-12T20:00:00

I love to take a lot of pictures lighthouse and a lot of landscape shots. I also have the EFS 15mm to 85mm lens as well, and even though I love that lens. The ef 16 to 35mm extra wide angle l series lens is a superior lens for landscaping and also if a person wants to take indoor low light pictures for a function it worth it. I am going Israel this year and I am going to be taking that lens with me. It's my one of my favorite Lenses that I have and I use the most. I recommend this lens to anyone. Plus you can't beat canon products, and also because I have two cameras an EOS 60D and an EOS 6D, and I love both cameras and all my other lenses from Canon Also Canon tech support department is great also. When I was looking into purchasing this lens, the tech person had said if your going to spend this kind of money, then he wanted to make sure I knew what I was buying. I am very pleased this lens and also pleased with them.

The w.

Originally posted at

2013-04-12T20:00:00

I have several L lenses. They are so heavy and I am paranoid about knocking them out of alignment. I read how much people loved this lens for landscape and interior shots. I bought two used and they were dogs. So I popped for a new one. I am so happy with it. I have taken it to Spain, France and England. This lens is fabulous for vacationing. You can shoot huge vistas and the inside of small spaces. The image quality is terrific and the photos are worth every bit of the trouble to bring it. In retrospect; If I had to have only one lens for my 5DmarkIII it would be this lens. Yes it is quite expensive but buying it new is the only way to go (and yes I have spent tons of money with CPS on cleanings, and recalibrations on lenses and cameras. If you want to know what to buy... you will never be disappointed having this 'go to' lens.

QAZ111111

Originally posted at

2012-09-12T20:00:00

This is a large, heavy, high quality lens. Focus is fast. Build quality is in line with other Canon L-series lenses. This lens is sharp from corner to corne, and has excellent contrast. If you're shooting with a high quality full frame sensor, the lens is so sharp in the center that you can crop 50 to 90% and still retain reasonable sharpness for small objects. Last week, I shot a one-inch long harlequin shrimp with the lens at 35mm in a fisheye dome port, and was able to crop the image to the shrimp with enough detail to where it was suitable for posting on the web. It's expensive, but if image quality is paramount, is worth it!

Benthic

Originally posted at

2012-05-14T20:00:00

This is a well built, good quality lens, but the image sharpness does not compare to the primes. For wide angle work I tend to use the 8-15 L fisheye, the 14 mm 2.8 L, and the 24 1.4L. I thought that this lens might eliminate having to carry both the 14 and the 24. I was wrong. If you are an amateur, you will most likely be thrilled with this lens. It produces acceptable images, and gives you a decent range in one lens. If you are a pro and sharpness is critical to you, stick with the lenses mentioned above and forget the wide angle zooms. For situations like weddings where you often do not have the time to change lenses on the fly, this lens is a good choice. (although I still find that the 14 and 24 work just fine. If the 14 is too wide, it is so sharp you can simply crop it in later.

Utopia

Originally posted at

2012-04-06T20:00:00

No distortion with this lens like I have read about on some of the other reviews. Must be OE on there part. Lens works great on 50D (1.6 x Crop Camera). I plan to go FF one day with maybe a 5D (Mark II or III). This lens completes my needs for wide angle, and lens needs that you would expect from a lens with the Red Ring around the end of the Barrel. I previously purchased the 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, 24-105mm 4, and now the 16-35mm 2.8 (in that order). This lens lives up to the L! Never shot with the 10-22mm or 17-40mm so I can't compare this lens to those... so read there reviews. If you are reading this review; I'd say that you are considering the purchase. If you can stomach the price; "Purchase this Lens"! It was stated earlier in a review; but You Get what You Pay for! Invest in the Glass!

Motivation

Originally posted at

2012-01-31T19:00:00

This is truly a fast and fantastic lens. I've reviewed the MTF charts beforehand and as compared to its predecessor (Mki) the edge detail is greatly improved. it's lightweight, comfortable to hold and works well in low light. My one and only and biggest gripe is the 82mm filter size that is needed. 82mm is not only the most expensive but also very difficult to find as of 1/31/12. As an example try and find the B&W #110 neutral density 10 stop filter..forget it and if you can find it the price is over $200 as with the polarizers being about $100 and the list goes on. This would be my only caution to you on this lens before buying. Not s smart move on Canon's part.

Revup67

Originally posted at

2012-01-25T19:00:00

Just got back from vacation in Vegas and I have to say this lens is phenomenal. My wife is also in awe at how colorful and accurate the pictures are. Went to the Grand Canyon and also Red Rock Canyon and this lens performed splendidly. I had the 17-40 L before and sold it. It was a tad too slow even though the range was more usable. I can't say enough about this lens. It is a bit on the expensive side but with pictures like I have gotten so far it was money well spent. My wife loves using the 24-105 L which is also an awesome lens also but I like the wider range and speed of this lens better. Everywhere we went we got the look of camera envy from everyone. Would definitely purchase again.

Bentley

Originally posted at

2011-08-06T21:00:00

In the beginnning I was so unsure about this lens. The more you use it the more creative you can get with it. So use it and shoot and shoot and shoot more, especially love the effect from the ground up to the sky just love the view!

LISA S.

2011-06-11T20:00:00

Overall this lens is not bad. I believe Canon should make IS to this lens. So the quality of the photos would be better. Some 20-35mm photos are out of focus or not too sharp. So this lens is still need to make some improvement. One more thing about this lens. It is over price. The photos quality, and performance are not good enough. Plus NO IS.

ET

Originally posted at

2011-06-05T20:00:00

Ultra-wide lenses like this are very difficult to do, and the MkII version scores. I just upgraded from the MkI version which served me without fault since 2004. The MkII does it all better however the lens gets 4/5 Feature and Performance stars for the following: The lens hood, while excellent, needs to be made of the new matte plastic as the 70-200 IS MkII lens and should include a hood lock button.

feeblefool

Originally posted at

2011-03-21T20:00:00

I have been a dedicated Canon owner since 1978 and still have my F-1 and arsenal of lens. Moving into the Digital era with an EOS-1D III, EOS-1DS and a new arsenal of L series lenses including the 16-35 F/2.8L II, I am more than happy with the performance, quality and images it has to offer. Partnering in support with alternative energy, corporate and industrial imagery I find this lens to be versatile and equal in most cases to my prime lenses.

Mick

Originally posted at

2011-02-20T19:00:00

I've found a new love, & it's this lens. Everything I thought it would be. I'm so happy I finally just purchased it and stopped thinking about buying!

BB

Originally posted at

2011-01-13T19:00:00

One of the reasons I purchased a full-frame DSLR was to benefit from super-wide-angle lenses. For most of my career I have owned prime lenses that includes 17mm, 20mm, and 24mm focal-lengths. I also own 28mm and 35mm lenses as well, Looking at how I was going to approach digital imaging, I decided that zoom lenses have made some incredible advances in image quality and mechanical quality. I reasoned it would be worthwhile to try a wide-angle zoom that would give me the range of all those primes. This would enable me to reduce the number of lenses carried. Now it's still valid to point out that most primes are going to give better image quality and certain ones are going to be faster. But if you're like me and spend a lot of time outdoors, you might be willing to make slight image compromises in favor of having the focal length and getting the image instead of a bad back... I don't feel I have compromised on image quality with this lens. It's fast enough for everything I've thrown at it, and like all the "L" glass I own, it's rock-solid. I have no regrets with my purchase of this lens. It's everything I expected and more! I can use the circular polarizer with both this lens and the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II. Not cheap but well worth the price of admission!

ppro

Originally posted at

2010-10-28T20:00:00

It's opened up a whole new world of imagery. Highly recommend it.

Silkline

Originally posted at

2010-09-17T20:00:00

Superb landscape lens and fast enough for low-light conditions when hiking in the rain forest. Rugged build with a speedy and silent auto-focus. Very useful range for a variety of landscape shots. The color is amazing and a circular polarizer makes it even better. Using the lens at 16mm requires some tenacity to avoid vignetting: try a slight reposition of the intended shot, f/8 helps, although I have managed some 16mm shots without vignetting at f/2.8 if I took the time to position the camera with care. I often shoot all day without taking this lens off my 5D MII. Highly recommended for advanced photographers.

Tim

Originally posted at

2010-07-09T20:00:00

This lens is spectacular. Even though I use it on a 50D, it is still very wide. I have used it for sports, portraits, concerts, and other subjects. It is very much worth the money, and is very sharp. I highly recommend this lens over most other wide angle lenses.

Bear

Originally posted at

2010-05-31T20:00:00

If your used to the image quality of a prime lens, this isn't the lens for you. All of the pros combined can't overcome the one con, distortion. I spent a lot of money on this lens; however, I think I'm going to trade it in on the faster 24mm prime.

Mr P.

Originally posted at

2009-12-26T19:00:00

Used this lens for one year now (primarily on my 5D Mark II) and it is absolutely amazing. Ultra sharp images and minimal barrel distortion at the edges. I don't think there is a better wide angle lens in the world. Expensive, but well worth it for the professional or amatuer wanting the best possible image quality to complement both the full frame or APSC camera.

Tripod

Originally posted at

2009-12-06T19:00:00

Having had the 17-35/2.8L, I was able to trade up to the 16-35 for a small $ investment. It seems that this lens is better suited to the wide angle needs of both the film photographer AND the digital photographer. While it is NOT inexpensive to purcase outright, anyone who IS serious sbout their photo results AND needs a quality wide-angle lens should look no further than this lens!!!!!

Pellix g.

Originally posted at