Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 III and Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS reviewed on medium format

[Vieri]

Always looking for great wide-angle options for my Hasselblad X1D, I decided to examine the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 III vs Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS. While I tested them on the Hasselblad X1D, the results will of course apply to FujiFilm GFX users as well, and have been surprisingly interesting.

Both lenses are useable on the 44 x 33mm sensor, with limitations of course, but the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 III is definitely the most interesting of the two.

Here is the full article: https://www.vieribottazzini.com/202...-vs-f-4-on-medium-format-in-depth-review.html

I hope you'll find it useful, and I am looking forward to your thoughts. Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Ben Egbert]

Wow, this is a lot of in depth work you did, as a Canon guy I find it very useful. Did you consider the Canon 11-24 f4 lens? Of course if does not take filters but it's a very capable lens.

 

[Vieri]

Hello Ben, thank you for your comment, glad you found it interesting & useful About the 11-24mm, I know it's extremely good (on FF), but it doesn't take 100mm filters which is a no-no for me, plus I am not sure whether it will cover a 44 x 33mm medium format sensor - do you have any information about that?

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Ben Egbert]

I do not but it is well corrected for distortion and is exclent for flare

as an 11 mm it should cover more area than a 16 mm I should think

 

[Vieri]

Hello again Ben,

thank you for the info. About 11 vs 16mm, while 11mm is wider than 16mm as far as the angle of view it covers, that per se doesn't mean that the image circle created by a 11mm lens is necessarily larger than the image circle created by a 16mm lens... Unfortunately, many wide-angles and ultra-wide angles designed for FF cameras don't cover much more than the 24x36mm FF sensor. If I'll ever get a chance to see a 11-24mm in the flesh, I'll definitely try it on and let you know Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Vieri]

UPDATE - Tested both lens with baffle removed

Upon various forum members' request, I went and tested both lenses removing the internal baffle present in both lenses. I then updated the review adding "no baffle" corner series at all tested focal lengths to check both zoom's behaviour without the baffle on.

In short, removing the baffle makes the f/4 lens usable on the X1D with no vignetting at the long end, and helps with the f/2.8 lens as well. At the short end, there is no difference in hard vignetting coming from removing the baffle; soft vignette becomes softer, but not dramatically so.

The problem, however, is that unfortunately removing the baffle also removes sharpness (from both lenses), limiting their usability to f/8 - f/11 (and sometimes even stopping down doesn't bring enough sharpness back).

For details and images, the link is still https://www.vieribottazzini.com/202...-vs-f-4-on-medium-format-in-depth-review.html

Hope this helps! Best regards

Vieri