Difference between mkII and 1st version 16-35f2.8L

[Daikoku]

Am a newbie to Canon..
Can anyone tell me what the difference between
mkII and 1st version for
16-35f2.8L?
Is the mkII significantly sharper? Especially wide open at f2.8?
Thanks in advance

[miniUltraman]

Read the various improvements here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

[Daikoku]

Originally Posted by miniUltraman Read the various improvements here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Thank you for the link...

After more then 15years with Nikon, finally going Canon
still quite unbelieveable....

[FilterFunk]

its ok, alot of people had made the switch, vice versa, or even other camps!

welcome to Canon!

[miniUltraman]

Originally Posted by Daikoku Thank you for the link... After more then 15years with Nikon, finally going Canon still quite unbelieveable....

good choice! welcome

[Daikoku]

Thanks for the welcome...
miniUltraman and FilterFunk
would like to see what the 16-35 can do....

[szekiat]

my first impressions from trying out the lens is that its not much better than the old in controlling edge distortion compared to the nikon 17-35. I think the domain of wideangle zooms is still very much in nikon's favor at the moment.

[miniUltraman]

Originally Posted by szekiat my first impressions from trying out the lens is that its not much better than the old in controlling edge distortion compared to the nikon 17-35. I think the domain of wideangle zooms is still very much in nikon's favor at the moment.

well.. I got to agree with that.. many pro canon users uses nikon 17-35 and nikon flash.. there is a reason behind that

[wilson68]

read here
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon...1635ii_a1.html