Last Updated: February 15th, 2020
The Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM lens has turned out to be one of our favorite wide angle lenses.
It offers a lot of flexibility that makes it usable both for wide landscape shots and tight portraits.
Our initial reason for buying it was to have an extra 35mm lens in our bag, for the times when we are shooting separately and need our own set of usable lenses – such as during getting ready photos on the wedding day when one of us are with the guys and the other with the ladies.
At the time of purchase, we decided that since we’re already spending the money, we may as well get a lens that is zoomable and would give us the opportunity to shoot at a really wide angle (as opposed to the 24mm we typically use). We were craving a really wide focal length anyways, especially after seeing the limitations of a 24mm while shooting landscapes in Iceland and some more recent portraits in Oregon.
Things to Know About the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 III
In our experience with purchasing new camera lenses, the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 iii lens has to be one of the simplest to understand right out of the box.
It’s purpose is clear – to take ultra-wide and wide angle photos. The zoomable lens enables a diverse range of opportunities, and the opportunity it presents on-the-fly composition restructuring is actually quite fun. When shooting dance floor photos in particular, this is something we really enjoy getting to put to use.
At 35mm, you can effectively take beautiful portrait images. As we mentioned, we had purchased the 35mm f/1.2 prime lens from Canon before this to use for portraits that could allow a little more breathing room than our 50mm or 85mm even could offer. The great thing about this is that you have the wider angle, but without the warping effect you can get when shooting at the ultra wide angles
At 16mm, you can really capture the environment. It’s a very interesting thing when showcasing a huge landscape in a single frame. When the composition is right, this type of image can be very powerful – even moreso when you have a human subject taking up some space and being used for scale.
In between, you have 24mm (and the micro-mm increments from there to 16 or 35), which can be used to hone in a better composition or take some interesting portraits (albeit with some distortion effects).
Outside of the examination of the focal lengths available in this lens, our general opinion towards it is very positive. The build quality is up to par with what we would expect from any pro camera lens from Canon, and it handles well even being roughly handled from time to time. The image quality, time-and-time again, is difficult to compete with – and one of the reasons we chose this lens over other options such as through other brands like Sigma.
Canon 16-35 2.8 III vs f4 (Lens Comparison)
One of the most common questions that comes up when someone is looking into buying a 16-35mm lens is deciding between the options available. Being Canon shooters, we trend towards looking at Canon brand lenses (and you probably do too, which is why you’re here!).
No doubt, before purchasing the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 III lens, we seriously considered purchasing the (more inexpensive) Canon 16-35 f/4 III lens. From all we have seen, these lenses are extremely similar. In terms of image quality output, they are virtually the same to the naked eye.
The major difference between the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 and Canon 16-35mm f/4 lenses are the aperture range – and what this means for you as a photographer.
Simply put, the more expensive lens enables you to shoot at f/2.8. We decided it was worth the expense because of the convenience it would provide when shooting indoors, and for the sake of revealing a similar depth of field as our Canon 35mm f/1.4 prime lens.
If your plan is to just shoot landscapes, you should have no issue going with the cheaper version of this lens and still be able to take breathtaking images. If you are like us and need a few extra stops of light, the f/2.8 lens option is excellent in it’s own right (and seriously works in low light).
