USA
Catalog   /   Photo   /   Camera Lenses

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

Add to comparison
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM III
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM II
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM IIICanon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM II
Compare prices 16Compare prices 5
TOP sellers
Lens typewide anglewide angle
Main functionlandscape
DxOMark rating34
System
Canon
Canon
Mount
Canon EF-S
Canon EF
Canon EF-S
Canon EF
Specs
Focal length16 - 35 mm16 - 35 mm
Aperture valuef/2.8f/2.8
Viewing angles
98° - 54°, 74° 10' - 38°, 108° 10' - 63° /horizontally, vertically, diagonally/
Min. diaphragm2222
Minimum focus distance0.28 m0.28 m
Maximum zoom0.250.22
Design
Sensor sizefull frame/APS-Cfull frame/APS-C
Autofocus driveultrasonic drive motorultrasonic drive motor
Internal focus
Design (elements/groups)16 elements in 11 groups16 elements in 12 groups
Number of diaphragm blades97
Dustproof & waterproof
Filter diameter82 mm82 mm
Dimensions (diameter/length)89x128 mm88.5x111.6 mm
Weight790 g635 g
Added to E-Catalogaugust 2016october 2007

Main function

The general purpose is rather conditional, and in fact the use of optics is not limited to the claimed direction — it all depends on the skills and imagination of the photographer. However, information about the specialization can greatly facilitate the choice. Considering such original options as a cinema lens and a multifunctional.

Architectural. Lenses designed primarily for shooting buildings. Most of these models are equipped with the Tilt-Shift system (see below). In this case, this function is intended to correct the perspective when shooting tall buildings. In a photograph taken with a normal lens, straight lines can turn out to be curved, which is unacceptable in cases where an accurate representation of the building in the picture is required. Using the Tilt-Shift system allows you to avoid this phenomenon and get a reliable image that does not require additional correction in a photo editor.

Landscape. In this case, landscape lenses include short-focus (wide-angle) lenses, which, according to test results, provide good image sharpness. In other words, not all “wide-angles” are classified as landscapes, but only those that are actually capable of providing a clear, sharp image.

Portrait. The hallmarks of a classic portrait lens are: first, the fixed focal le...ngth, which is usually over 50mm (35mm equiv.); secondly, high aperture (most often not lower than f / 2.8, although occasionally there are exceptions). This combination of characteristics allows you to shoot portraits with beautiful background blur, placing the camera at a fairly significant distance; the latter can be useful in studios where additional lighting equipment is used — it is advisable to install the camera behind lighting fixtures so that it does not give a shadow. Speaking of a fixed focal length, it is worth recalling that "fixes" are simpler, lighter and cheaper than zoom lenses, and the ability to adjust the magnification when shooting portraits is rarely required — most often you can completely get by with "zoom with your feet".

— Multifunctional. This direction includes lenses of a universal type (see above), offering the buyer a good value for money; in other words — multi-purpose models with good performance and at the same time relatively inexpensive (namely, "comparatively", the actual price can be quite high). When choosing models in this category, the quality of filming was evaluated according to the results of real tests.

Film lens. The main feature of cinema lenses is the ability to fine-tune the aperture. The aperture can be closed / opened by 0.1 or even 0.01 mm, while in photo lenses the aperture setting step cannot be less than 1 mm. Additionally, in cinema lenses, aperture is expressed by a T-number, and in photographic lenses, an F-number is used. The operator can shoot multiple cinema lenses with the same aperture, without the need to change the lighting. And when using photo lenses with the same aperture, you often have to adjust the lighting for each optic separately. Cinema lenses are meant to be shot from a tripod, which is reflected in their design features and design — such models are usually larger and heavier than their counterparts for photography.

DxOMark rating

The result shown by the lens in the DxOMark rating.

DxOMark is one of the most popular and authoritative resources for expert testing of photography devices. According to the test results, the lens receives a certain number of points; The more points, the higher the final score.

Viewing angles

This parameter determines the size of the area of the scene being shot that falls into the frame. The wider the viewing angles, the larger the area the lens can capture in one shot. They are directly related to the focal length of the lens (see "Focal length"), and also depend on the size of the specific matrix with which the optics are used: for the same lens, the smaller the matrix, the smaller the viewing angles, and vice versa. On our website, in the characteristics of optics, viewing angles are usually indicated when used with the matrix for which the lens was originally designed (for more details, see "Matrix Size").

Maximum zoom

The degree of magnification of the object being shot when using a lens for macro shooting (that is, shooting small objects at the maximum possible approximation, when the distance to the subject is measured in millimetres). The degree of magnification in this case means the ratio of the size of the image of the object obtained on the matrix of the camera to the actual size of the object being shot. For example, with an object size of 15 mm and a magnification factor of 0.3, the image of this object on the matrix will have a size of 15x0.3=4.5 mm. With the same matrix size, the larger the magnification factor, the larger the image size of the object on the matrix, the more pixels fall on this object, respectively, the clearer the resulting image, the more details it can convey and the better the lens is suitable for macro photography. It is believed that in order to obtain macro shots of relatively acceptable quality, the magnification factor should be at least 0.25 – 0.3.

Design (elements/groups)

The number of elements (in fact, the number of lenses) included in the design of the lens, as well as the number of groups in which these elements are combined. Usually, the more elements provided in the design, the better the lens handles with distortions (aberrations) when light passes through it. On the other hand, numerous lenses increases the dimensions and weight of the optics, reduces light transmission (for more details, see "Aperture") and also puts forward increased requirements for the quality of processing, which affects the cost of the lens.

Number of diaphragm blades

The number of blades provided in the design of the diaphragm (for details, see "Minimum aperture"). In fact, this parameter is important when shooting scenes with pronounced bokeh (blurred background) and a small depth of field: the more petals the aperture has, the smoother the glare from out-of-focus objects will turn out, while with a small number of petals they can look like polygons. The number of aperture blades has almost no effect on other shooting parameters. Modern lenses have an average of 7-9 petals; the smoothing provided by them in most cases is considered quite sufficient.

Dustproof & waterproof

Lenses with protection against ingress of dust and moisture. "Protected" optics are useful primarily for those who have to shoot a lot outdoors: they are much more resistant to bad weather than ordinary ones, many of these lenses work quietly in the rain, sea spray, etc. However, the specific degree of protection for different models can significantly differ, this point should be specified separately in the official documentation of the manufacturer. Also note that if you intend to constantly shoot in difficult external conditions, not only the lens, but also the camera itself must have dust and water protection.
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM III often compared
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L EF USM II often compared