p.2 #2 · Anyone switched to the Canon 16-28mm f/2.8 STM from a 14/15/16-35mm variant and regret it?
DustinLevine wrote:
There might be some copy variance going on there. 2470mm lenses are typically much sharper optics than ultrawide zooms, but I am completely happy with my 1535 performance.
Thanks for your thoughts, seems everyone who owns the 1628 is happy with it, but also people that own the 1535 also say they wouldn't trade it for the 1628.
Before I purchased the 15-35 I read all the reviews and looked at hundreds of images, including downloading RAW files. I was excited to shoot it but as said, really didn’t like it at all. Sample variations are the only explanation that makes sense. You are spot on with the 24-70 L. Mine is wonderfully sharp! It’s big and heavy but just makes amazing images!!
p.2 #3 · Anyone switched to the Canon 16-28mm f/2.8 STM from a 14/15/16-35mm variant and regret it?
EB-1 wrote:
Why not rent the distorted, cheaper lens first? I would not give up a good copy of the 15-35/2.8 if I had a reasonable usage.
EBH
I already rented the 28-70mm STM lens about 6 months ago, and compared it very thoroughly to my 24-70mm L.
So I am assuming the 16-28mm is going to perform basically the same, as they share the same everything. And honestly do not want to add more costs on top of a potential switch.
I know I will be happy with it's performance, I just know I will also miss the longer end at times, but not miss the weight. Everything has a pro and a con.
Seems everyone who have sold off a 15-35mm lens for the 1628 is 100% happy and no regrets, while people who own the 1535mm says they would never swap.
p.2 #4 · Anyone switched to the Canon 16-28mm f/2.8 STM from a 14/15/16-35mm variant and regret it?
chad hites wrote:
Before I purchased the 15-35 I read all the reviews and looked at hundreds of images, including downloading RAW files. I was excited to shoot it but as said, really didn’t like it at all. Sample variations are the only explanation that makes sense. You are spot on with the 24-70 L. Mine is wonderfully sharp! It’s big and heavy but just makes amazing images!!
At certain focal lengths and apertures, my 15-35mm outperforms my 24-70mm f/2.8 L.
Especially at 24mm, I've tested it on a tripod shooting the same scene. my 1535 @ 24mm is sharper and shows more details especially in the corners. Dead center is closer to even.
p.2 #5 · Anyone switched to the Canon 16-28mm f/2.8 STM from a 14/15/16-35mm variant and regret it?
DustinLevine wrote:
At certain focal lengths and apertures, my 15-35mm outperforms my 24-70mm f/2.8 L.
Especially at 24mm, I've tested it on a tripod shooting the same scene. my 1535 @ 24mm is sharper and shows more details especially in the corners. Dead center is closer to even.
That is amazing! Either you’re lucky with your copy or I’m was really unlucky with mine. For the price of the lens I was anticipating your results. I am really happy you have a great performer and I eventually resolved my issues.
p.2 #6 · Anyone switched to the Canon 16-28mm f/2.8 STM from a 14/15/16-35mm variant and regret it?
DustinLevine wrote:
At certain focal lengths and apertures, my 15-35mm outperforms my 24-70mm f/2.8 L.
Especially at 24mm, I've tested it on a tripod shooting the same scene. my 1535 @ 24mm is sharper and shows more details especially in the corners. Dead center is closer to even.
This is also my experience between the EF 16-35 f/4 and EF 24-70 2.8 II. I'd expect a lens in the middle of its range to outperform one at its limit. I'm surprised he's having such trouble with the RF 15-35 given that it's the top shelf zoom in that range.
