Objektívkereső

Tippek:
Írjon legalább 2 karaktert
Próbálja meg így szűkíteni a keresést: pl. 70 300 is
Ha hasznosnak találja ezt az oldalt, akkor vásárolja meg objektívjeit és kiegészítőit partnereinktől. Köszönjük a támogatását.
$1 499,00
Vegye meg most

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM lens
 

Teljes méretű vetített kép

Az APS-C méretű képet vetítő objektíveket kimondottan a digitális fényképezőgépekhez fejlesztették, ezért nem használhatók filmes gépeken, vagy olyan digitális fényképezőgépeken, amelyekben az APS-C méretűnél nagyobb érzékelő található.

 

Ultrahangos AF

Az ultrahangos automatikus élességállítással szerelt objektívek általában halkabbak és gyorsabbak, mint a tradicionálisan működő objektívek.

 

Egy vagy több alacsony szórású lencsetag is van benne

Az alacsony szórású lencsetagok segítenek csökkenteni a kromatikus aberrációt.

 

Nem stabilizált

A képstabilizátor segít csökkenteni a kéz remegéséből adódó elmosódásokat. A stabilizátor hatása elsősorban nagy gyújtótávolságnál és gyenge megvilágításnál érezhető. A képstabilizátor 1-3 fényértéknyi előnyt biztosít a nem stabilizált objektívekhez képest.

 

Fém bajonett

Az olcsóbb objektívek általában műanyag, míg a drágábbak fém bajonettel készülnek. Általában a fém bajonettek tartósabbak, így gyakori objektívcserénék ez a szerencsésebb. Ha egy fényképezőgépet főleg egy objektívvel használunk, akkor a bajonett anyaga nem annyira lényeges.

 

Belső élességállítású

A belső élességállítású objektívek mérete az élességállítás során nem változik.

 

A front lencse fix

A fix frontlencse az élesség és/vagy a gyújtótávolság állításakor nem fordul el. Ez lehetővé teszi, hogy a fotós szirom alakú napellenzőt használjon. A fix frontlencse megjönnyíti a polarizációs szűrők használatát is.

 

Időjárásálló

Az időjárásálló objektívek védettek a víz és a por ellen. Ugyan nem vízállóak, de esőben és más nedves, párás környezetben is jól használhatók. Egyes szigetelések csak a víz vagy csak a por ellen védenek, nem mindkettő ellen. A szigetelés csak akkor működik, ha az objektív egy hasonló módon szigetelt vázon van.

 

Nincs becsúsztatható szűrő

A becsúsztatható szűrőket olyan objektíveknél alkalmazzák, amelyek frontlencséje túl nagy, illetve amelyek látószöge túl nagy ahhoz, hogy hagyományos szűrőket lehessen rájuk tenni. Általában a nagy fényerejű tele, illetve az ultra-nagy látószögű objektíveknél fordul elő ez a megoldás.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Specifikáció

Elérhető bajonett(ek) Canon EF
Felhasználási terület(ek) Tájkép, Belső terek, Épület
Kategóriák Nagy látószögű zoom
Szorzó 1×
Stabilizátor nem
Gyújtótávolság 16 - 35 mm (2,20× zoom)
Objektív felépítése 16 lencsetag 12 csoportban
Látószög 35mm: 108.2-63°
digitális: nincs adat
Lamellák száma nincs adat
Legnagyobb blende nagy látószög: f/2,8 tele: f/2,8
Legkisebb blende nagy látószög: f/22 tele: nincs adat
Legkisebb tárgytávolság 28 cm
Nagyítás 0,22×
Szűrőmenet 82 mm
Méret ∅ 88.5 × 111.6 mm
Tömeg 635 g
Megjegyzések
AF sebesség nincs adat
AF hang
Belső élességállítás igen
Belső zoom nincs adat
Fix frontlencse igen
Bajonett típusa fém
Időjárásálló igen
Becsúsztatható szűrők nem
Ultrahangos AF igen
APS-C méretű vetített kép nem
Alacsony szórású lencsetag igen
Kemény tok nincs adat
Puha tok nincs adat
Napellenző nincs adat
Állvány adapter nincs adat
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Specifikáció

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Tesztek

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM a hírekben

Other reviews

Nincs megjeleníthető teszt

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Olvasói tesztek

Leghasznosabb olvasói vélemények az Amazonról

Modest improvement mostly for full frame users

2008. január 06.

I have owned both this and the original version. The new lens is better in the corners and flares less but the corners are still a little soft at f2.8 and you can get the lens to flare a little if you try. I haven't seen the loss of clarity above 20mm that others reported. Perhaps you would see a slight difference in eyelashes if you did a lot of portraits but this is probably not the best choice for a portrait lens. It is a somewhat better lens for shooting landscapes and other shots where edge to edge clarity is important.

But the differences between the two versions are minor and in some instances irrelevant. If you don't shoot a full frame camera the soft edges don't appear in the photo. And flare is a minimal issue at most. It rarely appears and is easy to fix in Photoshop if it does. I would opt for the original if I didn't shoot full frame based on the price difference alone.

My only problem with the original was when I had to shoot hand held. Sometimes you can't bring a tripod along which rules out shooting at f16 or 22 so I occasionally ended up with shots that were soft in some of the edges. The new lens will solve that. That is the only reason I decided to upgrade.

I haven't used many other lenses in the same range so I can't compare quality with other makers but I'm not aware of anything reputed to be better. I have Canon primes as well as other Canon zooms and in actual use all are generally close in quality. I use the primes if possible when I plan to crop or enlarge a lot but I could still get by nicely with the zooms.

So, if you shoot less than full frame or if price is an issue, get the original. If you shoot full frame but need maximum clarity in the center (portraits for example), test both versions first. If you shoot full frame and need maximum edge to edge clarity, go with the new lens.

Update: Having shot this lens for a long period I would discount the comments about problems above 20mm. I owned the first version as well and I don't see a difference in the 20mm to 35mm range. On the contrary, I am increasingly impressed with the image quality and sharpness of this lens throughout the range. I recently used it into a very narrow slot canyon where I couldn't take more than the camera and the lens attached to it and took shots from 16mm up to 35mm that all came out very sharp and rich. Granted I wasn't shooting wide open because I needed lots of depth of field but the point is the lens delivered the best shots of that trip. In terms of versatility, this lens is unmatched for wide angle use by Canon owners. I also have the 14mm f2.8 II, 17mm f4. TS/E and 15mm fisheye for comparison. This is the one wide angle lens I always take along.

Better at 16, but goes soft after 24mm

2007. május 16.

UPDATE: Since posting this review, I have done further experimentation and am coming to a conclusion (no new info from Canon thus far) that (in addition to this lens's gaussian factor) this new version is just more difficult for current camera bodies to focus, which is probably 70 percent of the problem that I'm seeing. Since this was released for the new 1DmIII camera body, we can hope that the 19 enhanced cross-type sensors will handle this lens better than current bodies. I am leaving the rest of the review as written, because the tradeoff against the long end is real, as is the gaussian effect beyond 24mm relative to the original version. Also because it accuratley reflects how others will encounter this same phenomenon. Based on this, I would up my star rating to 3.5 if they had decimals.... Also: Would like to clarify my remark below about it cleaning up the corners as advertised. I mean that remark to apply to the 16-20mm range only, because at 24mm I have a test shot showing a better corner from the original version I lens, which is to re-emphasize that 24mm is the point where the older lens takes over... END UPDATE

Canon has hyped this new lens as an improvment over the great original 16-35, but in reality it's not a net improvment at all. Rather, it is just a tradeoff... What they're not telling you is that, compared to the original version, this lens goes soft at focal lengths beyond 24mm, where they are near the same in quality. I acknowledge that the new lens DOES clean up the corners as advertised, but if you shoot people for a living like I do, be prepared for soft eyes and disappearing eye lashes looking back at you. In many common shots this lens cannot resolve eye lashes at near distances, where the old version can and does... If you hate seeing soft eyes in a slew of your professional pictures, you will find some consternation in this lens just as I have... I am not happy with the compromise at all... Everything else about the lens is what you expect from a Canon L, which is to say it has awesome build quality and it's heavy. I have already owned two copies of this lens and have shot and tested a third. They all have the same softness problem. It was apparently a deliberate design compromise, but Canon's support techs have not yet been brought up to speed on how to explain or position this to customers, at least not in my experience. I have frustrated them by asking this question on the phone repeatedly, and they can't answer it. They're starting to get mad when I call back... I did send my first one in for calibration. They found something to adjust, but it did not help.... Moral of the story: If you like your original version, DON'T sell it. You need BOTH. This new one will effectively be your 16-20mm, and the old one will be your 24-35mm... I think it's very sad needing to carry two of the same lens, but that's what this situation has come to. We definitely needed a fix at 16mm, and this one provides it. But it comes at the expense of messing up the 24-35 range where the original version was awesome and where it is still the king.... Others have pointed that you can sub the 24-70/2.8 into this range, and I agree, but at the expense of having to change lenses way more often and having to always have the 24-70 available.... I'm finding this new situation very iconvenient.... Personally, I'm just going to think of this as the super bulky and inconvenient 16mm prime that they should have built instead.... Oh, and final note: Canon continues to make the old version of the 70-200/2.8L despite having added the IS version. I think this 16-35 thing should be that way, too, because many people who do my type of work for a living will choose the sharpness of the original lens over the corner-CA-elimination factor of the newer lens. If I had to choose just one of these lenses, I would choose the OLD one, which I would rate at 4.5 stars versus this turkey. I think discontinuation of the original version at this point in time would be both unwarranted and mildly insane. Can you tell I like sharp pictures?

It is a 16-20mm lens

2007. május 17.

I fully agree with the first reviewer. This lens excels at 16-20mm range. For 24-35mm it is actually less sharp when compared with my 24-105 (but has less distort and vignetting).

I definiely want the lens to perform equally well in the entire zoom range. But if a compromise has to be made, the 16-20mm range is what I need it for. My primary lens is 24-105, which accounts for 70% of all my shots.

Going on vacation?

2009. február 11.

Many people have stated the facts about this lens. Instead of restating them, let me add what I use it for:

For nature photography, this is the only lens I need. Just put something pretty in the foreground (flowers, rocks, etc.) and let the lens magically stretch out the horizon to add drama and flair to the shot. Makes beaches MAGICAL... Makes forests imposing. Adds desolation to the desert.

And from a business perspective:

As a wedding shooter, I use it to stretch out small/boring churches and make them more dramatic. It is also great to use from above for dancefloor shots and really makes the shots DYNAMIC and interesting.

And finally:
If you are deciding between this and the 17-40, let me save you some time... there is a huge difference between 16mm and 17mm. Don't waste time buying the 17 and then selling it at a loss to upgrade like I did.

If you're going to go wide.. go wide baby. ;)

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Review

2007. május 13.

I owned a pretty good copy of the original 16-35 and this one is slightly sharper in the middle, but most definitely sharper along the edges. You notice it most with a full frame sensor camera like the 1DS of 5D.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Minta fotók

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Kiegészítők

Napellenzők a Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM objektívre

82 mm Szűrők

82 mm Polár szűrők

82 mm UV szűrők

82 mm Skylight szűrők

82 mm Objektívsapkák

Hasonló objektívek

További objektívek

Objektív kiegészítők

Nikon 8072 Microfiber Cleaning Cloth$3,34
Digital SLR Camera & Lens 7-Piece Deluxe Cleaning Kit including Cameta Microfiber Cleaning Cloth - for Canon EOS Rebel XT, XTi, XS, XSi, T1i, 50D, 40D, 5D 7D, 1D, Mark II Digital SLR Cameras$9,95
Bower Capkeeper With Elastic - Bower HQACAPKPR$0,01
Copyright 2006 - 2010 © Pixinfo Kft. | Weboldal dizájn | Logó dizájn | Szerver hoszting | Snapfish online fotókidolgozás