Corner tests for 16-35 f/4 vs. 16-35 f/2.8 (v.1) vs. 24-70 f/2.8L II

Started Jul 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
OP hotdog321 Forum Pro • Posts: 19,004
Re: Love note to the nit pickers.

Jay A wrote:

Sorry for my ignorance, but I am not sure what exactly is wrong with the way the OP did his testing here. He compared the same focal lengths, and used the same f-stops. The corners look better from the shots with the 16-35 F4 than they do with the 16-35 F2.8...both shot at F4. If he used the same focal lengths and same f-stops, from the same shooting distance, the depth-of-field will be the same. While I understand that different lenses produce different bokeh, I seriously doubt that this is the case here. The corners from the 16-35 F2.8 (which has been known since it hit the market to have poor corners) looks awful compared to the F4 lens. One of the major reasons Canon designed the F4 lens was to deal with the criticism it has gotten for years about its UW zoom corners. So now they come out with a new lens supposedly dealing with that, a test is done showing their success, and we want to say "oh no, it's not that they have improved the corners, it's the way the two lenses handle bokeh." Are you kidding me?

By the way, if the results are so because of a field curvature issue, so be it. If THAT is what is making the 2.8 lens look worse, then apparently the new lens deals with this better. I don't see how this invalidates the test. Plus I don't get this "focusing too deep into the scene" idea. How do we know exactly where he focused and whether or not it varied from one lens to the next? Unless he has stated otherwise (sorry I have not read the ENTIRE thread and I apologize for not doing so...just too much bickering for my taste), I would assume he focused on the same spot with both lenses. If you want to call it a "bokeh" comparison, so be it as well. Fact is, if all else is equal (and I see no reason to believe it is not), and the F4 lens makes the corners look better than the F2.8 lens does, well then the F4 lens handles corners better. No? Isn't that one of the major reasons Canon built it?

Precisely. I was simply doing a side-by-side test under "real world" conditions. People can (and do) argue endlessly about hyper focal distances, bokeh, focusing points, curvature, "good copy lens," yada, yada, yada. I've spent more time than I can mention studying minutia--which is lots of fun--but I stick with real world handling and experience when checking gear I'll actually use on assignments.

Again, if someone doesn't like the way I did the test, buy your own darn lenses.

 hotdog321's gear list:hotdog321's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow