Canon 16-35 f2.8 vs. f4: Is it Worth the Extra $1000?

Подписаться 147 тыс.

Просмотров 110 тыс.

50% 1

Canon makes two 16-35mm L Series lenses: an f/2.8 and an f/4. They’re both incredible, but there’s a $1000 price difference. Is that difference really worth it, and how much of an impact does 2.8 vs 4 really have on your videos and photos?
Time Markers:
0:00 - Lens Overview
1:03 - Differences Between 2.8 and 4
1:56 - Why the 2.8 is Better (even though I didn't buy it)
3:23 - Camera Settings
3:42 - What does 16mm Look Like?
4:53 - f4 vs. 2.8 Comparison
6:55 - f4 vs. 2.8 Side by Side
7:42 - IS Comparison
9:34 - Weight Comparison
10:15 - My Conclusions
•f2.8:
geni.us/5NSUyps (Amazon)
•f4 w/ IS (this is the one I personally own)
geni.us/h1Ys (Amazon)
•My full review on the 16-35 f4:
• Canon 16-35 F/4 Review...
Episode 122: Canon 16-35 f2.8 vs f4
» Ready to start your own podcast? Check out The Podcaster Playbook, my step-by-step DIY course to help you launch your show!
podcasterplaybook.com
-----------------------
Affiliate links mean I earn a commission from qualifying purchases. This helps support my channel at no additional cost to you.
-----------------------
----------- CONNECT -----------
🎯 Subscribe! bit.ly/TEPsub
Instagram & Twitter: @sodarntom
Main Site: himynameistom.com
My Podcasts: himynameistom.com/podcasts
Patreon: / tombuck
Become a Channel Member: geni.us/joinchannel
----------- MUSIC -----------
•Artlist.io (2 Extra Months Free): bit.ly/enthusiasmartlist
•Epidemic Sound (30 Day Free Trial): share.epidemicsound.com/enthus...
----------- VIDEO GEAR -----------
•Canon EOS R (main camera): geni.us/0jnes1y (Amazon)
•Sigma 24 1.4 Art (main lens): geni.us/uvi3Fy (Amazon)
•Canon RF 50 1.8: geni.us/Zw30tt5 (Amazon)
•Canon 16-35 f4 IS: geni.us/h1Ys (Amazon)
•Canon 24-105 f4 IS: geni.us/ecnKnN (Amazon)
•DJI Mavic Mini: geni.us/Eh92 (Amazon)
•ATEM Mini Video Switcher: geni.us/YDcRX (Amazon)
•ATEM Mini Extreme ISO: geni.us/CCj5xl (Amazon)
•Elgato CamLink 4K: geni.us/vddHN (Amazon)
•Ecamm Live for Streaming: geni.us/ecammtom
----------- AUDIO GEAR -----------
•Rodecaster Pro (for podcasts): geni.us/9MKJ (Amazon)
•Rode PodMic: geni.us/EHeTTM (Amazon)
•Rode Videomic NTG: amzn.to/2ZKrHTh (Amazon)
•Rode Boom Arm: geni.us/shr0 (Amazon)
•Rode Wireless Go: geni.us/LvzUSM (Amazon)
•Shure MV7 USB/XLR Mic: geni.us/shuremv (Amazon)
•Shure Super 55 Mic: geni.us/ulcA (Amazon)
•Shure SM7B: geni.us/tepsm7b (Amazon)
•Cloudlifter Signal Booster: geni.us/b26l (Amazon)
----------- LIGHTS, TRIPODS, & GRIP GEAR -----------
•Nanlite Forza 200 (Key Light): geni.us/9Ofr (Amazon)
•Aputure Light Dome Mini (for key light): geni.us/vf5O (B&H)
•Falconeyes Flexible LED Light: geni.us/j4ENw (Amazon)
•Small Nanlite RGB Tube Lights: geni.us/nanlite (Amazon)
•Big Nanlite RGB Tube Lights: geni.us/nTwBU (Amazon)
•Aputure MC RGB Light: geni.us/IuE4 (Amazon)
•Impact C-Stand for Lights: geni.us/k97w66m (Amazon)
•Manfrotto Tripod Head: geni.us/tGhCPR (Amazon)
•Manfrotto 055x Tripod Legs: geni.us/qMO2 (Amazon)
•Motorized Slider: geni.us/mQXB7BB (Amazon)
•Overhead Camera Rig: geni.us/grpT (Amazon)
•GlideGear Prompter: geni.us/7K04A (Amazon)
-----------------------
- Who Am I? -
Hi! My name is Tom Buck. As a lifelong A/V nerd, I’m here to help you level up the audio and video quality of your streams, podcasts, puns, and videos. I was a high school Digital Media teacher for 11 years, and I started this channel in 2017 as a project to share my enthusiasm for digital media and teaching others while having fun along the way.
New videos are uploaded every Thursday morning, and more often when possible!
•Read my Ethics Statement about objective reviews, sponsored content, and brand partnerships: himynameistom.com/ethics
-----------------------
#Canon #Lenses #TeamCanon
-----------------------

Опубликовано:

13 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 276

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Time Markers: 0:00 - Lens Overview 1:03 - Differences Between 2.8 and 4 1:56 - Why the 2.8 is Better (even though I didn't buy it) 3:23 - Camera Settings 3:42 - What does 16mm Look Like? 4:53 - f4 vs. 2.8 Comparison 6:55 - f4 vs. 2.8 Side by Side 7:42 - IS Comparison 9:34 - Weight Comparison 10:15 - My Conclusions

@xenawars 4 года назад

I think you made a good choice. What I do to pick lenses: Zooms all f4 : 14-24mm / 24-70mm / 70-200mm (Cheaper and lighter) Fast Primes: Just pick the ones you need and fast version f1.8 / f.1.4 / f1.2

@tombuck 4 года назад

This is a good rule of thumb 👍

@justinbuice 4 года назад

Great comparison! I vote for the F4 for the IS and lighter weight. I see the F4 being a more video oriented lens for those reasons. At 16mm the depth of field isn’t really that shallow on either lens, certainly not $1000 more shallow 👍🏻

@tombuck 4 года назад

I agree completely. The only caveat being that the 2.8 is a bit better for indoor video, but the f4 is awesome.

@troybabs 4 года назад

One year later and your review is still very much relevant. So thank you for this. No more debate needed... I'm going with the f/4! 📷 ... Oh but you're 24mm f/.18 is so sweet and tempting too! :)

@tombuck 4 года назад

Oh my gosh, I LOVE the 24 1.4. Beyond words.

@keomazec1306 3 года назад

Dude. I always struggle to get through RU-vid reviews of gear but this one was absolutely perfect. You completely nailed it and basically covered everything that needs to be covered in a very sober way. Also you seem like a really humble and cool dude unlike a LOT of people on social media. Great job!

@tombuck 3 года назад

Oh wow, thank you so much! I definitely try to make videos I'd actually want to watch, so I'm really glad to know it was helpful!

@JeffMartinelli 5 лет назад

Great video. LOVE the real life comparison. Your videos are so thorough.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Thank you sir! I’m glad it was helpful!

@AndreiRestrepo 4 года назад

Nice video man! I currently have the 16-35 f4 lens, been using it all year and it’s solid! Always questioned if the 2.8 would be a great upgrade but watching this definitely makes me feel like it’s not. However, that new 15-35 2.8 IS RF Lens seems like a win!

@tombuck 4 года назад

The f4 really is a champ. The new RF looks great (aside from the price)!

@lilysky4967 3 года назад

Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for putting this up!

@tombuck 3 года назад

You’re welcome! Glad it was helpful!

@blackmamba3427 3 года назад

Awesome video and explanation. You answered the burning question I had for sometime. Thank you.

@tombuck 3 года назад

Really happy to hear that!

@CJKnowsTECH 5 лет назад

Great video. I like you picked the F4 and couldn't be happier.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

It’s an awesome lens at a fair price 😎

@CJKnowsTECH 5 лет назад

The Enthusiasm Project Absolutely. Saved a $1000 to put towards other gear. Also the IS is perfect for vlogging content

@kristenmcgowan6575 2 года назад

This was a great video! Simple and to the point! thank you

@tombuck 2 года назад

Thanks so much! I really appreciate that!

@DB-nl9xw 4 года назад

Great comparison! Finally someone comparing the f4 vs the f2.8!

@jv8studios 3 года назад

Ive been looking for this one for awhile! but i went with the f2.8 and im enjoying it so far

@anayatkhan8377 5 лет назад

Thanks for tha great review you solve my confusion😊😊😊😊

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Fantastic! I’m glad it helped out!

@TylerEdwards 5 лет назад

Great comparison. I came to the same conclusion and love the f4 version. Awesome video!

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Thanks Tyler! It’s such a great lens.

@foresterg8564 2 года назад

Dear Tom, thank you for that review, this is the best review on youtube! I spent so much time to find it. Wish you all the best!

@tombuck 2 года назад

I really appreciate the kind words Sergei! Thank you! 🙏

@gentlegnt 3 года назад

Man...is there any more of a thorough review than what you have offered us? I don't think so. The immediate swapping video images made it SO perfect to decide!! Thank you so very much. I am buying 2nd hand and only have owned 24-70 and other zoom lenses and some primes. Trying to decide now between 24-70 2.8 or this model you showed (2.8). Hmmm....!! Thanks again!!

@tombuck 3 года назад

I'm so glad it helped! The 24-70 is definitely a great lens too, and I hope to add one to my lineup someday.

@Duckstalker1340 5 лет назад

If you mainly shoot landscape then go for the f/4, if you also shoot astro then go with the f/2.8.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Good advice 👍

@hjorturlevi5781 4 года назад

Nice job..... Good comperising 👍👍👍

@RGMGFitness 4 года назад

Great review and nicely done with those comparison shots. Though, for your studio shots that SIGMA 24mm (f1.4 - Art Lens) is looking really nice. Has some really nice bokeh. Like yourself I'm looking for a lens with image stabilization and that can give me some nice bokeh as well. That sigma's looking pretty sweet but all my gear is Canon so not switching manufacturers for obvious reasons. Looking for a nice Canon lens for video mostly that I can use for the majority of my indoor product shots and has some nice bokeh to it. This was helpful....I think I need to keep looking.

@tombuck 4 года назад

The sigma really is outstanding, and with the EOS R's autofocus, the 1.4 aperture is really usable. Of course there's always the Canon 24 1.4, but that's a bit out of my budget. I'm a fan of wide lenses with wide apertures. 👍

@LastTurnFilms 5 лет назад

Great comparison! I agree with you, that price gap would be a hard sell; especially when you have a camera that can easily handle that slight bump in ISO and the footage from the f4 looked so great (and the I.S. certainly doesn't hurt). 2.8 is nice, but maybe not $1000 nice!

@tombuck 5 лет назад

My thoughts exactly. If the more expensive one were 1.8 or 1.4 it’d be a no brainer, but 2.8 vs 4 isn’t a HUGE difference.

@LincolnintheAdirondacks 5 лет назад

Great video! I’m trying to make a decision on these lenses. Lol idk what I’ll do.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Dude, lens choices are some of the hardest choices. 😬

@TruthReviews 2 года назад

Amazing video, thank you. Appreciate it.

@tombuck 2 года назад

Glad you enjoyed it!

@mikepook2285 3 года назад

SUPER helpful review - thanks Tom!

@tombuck 3 года назад

My pleasure!

@GetBusyLiving 3 года назад

@@tombuck I really enjoy your videos. You do such a thorough job, and your style is really engaging, relaxed and authentic. I am learning alot from your channel. BTW I like the podcast you and Peter Lindgren have started as well. Thanks for acknowledging my comment, and keep up the great work! Mike

@tombuck 3 года назад

Thanks for the kind words! I really appreciate and I’m glad you’re liking the videos/podcast.

@RedLP5000S 3 года назад

Great comparison. With the IS of the f4, it makes it so much more capable than the f2.8.

@PeterFoeng 5 лет назад

Great comparison, very useful for me as I am deciding between these two lens. Will you do a review for 24-105 f4 as well? Many thanks!

@tombuck 5 лет назад

I have the original 24-105, but I can borrow a Mark II and compare them. Now that’s a lens I wish was 2.8.

@danielson_9211 4 года назад

I bought the f4 before the 2.8 version 3 came out because the version 2 wasn't as sharp as the f4, The IS helps a lot when freehanding, when using it for landscapes you are not going to use 2.8 or f4 anyways, glad I got the f4 no regrets. Switching over to the R5 or R6 and going to get the 2.8 version since it has IS, 15 a little wider and it is sharper than both EF.

@tombuck 4 года назад

The RF 15-35 really is an excellent lens. 🤤

@Er1c91 4 года назад

I am with you 100% I have been going back and forth, but I use my camera primarily for video so IS helps on my 6d2. Plus at 16-35 2.8 it’s hard to even get a super shallow DOF because it’s so wide. Definitely think you are right on with this, not worth double the price in my eyes. Plus I shoot real estate as well so I never go below f7 doing that anyway lol 😂 I’m with you on the sigma art series as well 👌🏻 excellent glass and beautiful bokeh. Thanks for making this! 👍🏻😎

@tombuck 4 года назад

Glad it helped! Love the 2.8, but that price is really prohibitive.

@BrannonNod 5 лет назад

Great Video once again... I use the 16-35 F4 as well but again I do RU-vid reviews and vlog as well You could always do talking head vids with the 50mm 1.8 for Extreme Boka...lol but lose the wider background of course!

@tombuck 5 лет назад

That’s the tough part because I wanted the wider field of view since I often have stuff to show and I usually talk with my hands like a maniac. The F4 is a beautiful lens for sure!

@matthewk7013 4 года назад

Like many people says before, thanks for this video. Helps me too👍

@tombuck 4 года назад

I’m glad to hear it!

@tessaderksen3387 4 года назад

Really love this!

@jv8studios 3 года назад

Its a really great video! are you a photographer?

@DroneServices 4 года назад

I need something wide and fast for my c200 and eosr, stumbled onto your channel while comparing lenses... love your reviews! very helpful!! :) still stuck on a lens though lol, thinking sigma 14-24 2.8. . . fast as you're gonna get i think (for a full frame zoom?)

@tombuck 4 года назад

Hey! The Sigma 14-24 is probably the widest/fastest lens you’re going to get (at least without totally breaking the bank). I did a review on it if you haven’t seen it- I really like it.

@JustinManson 4 года назад

I was looking for a new wide angle first looking at the sigma 18-35 f1.8. But now ending up deciding between the f4 and f2.8 the IS really is the biggest selling point imo. Really nice video as well!

@tombuck 4 года назад

Glad it helped! IS is definitely a great feature.

@thattassiewargamer 5 лет назад

Great review. I’m looking at the16-35mm for landscapes so I’d seldom open up to a wide aperture anyway. I can’t see $1000 value in the wider aperture.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

It’s a great landscape lens. I recommend checking out Thomas Heston’s channel. He’s a landscape photographer who does amazing work with the 16-35 f4. 😎

@Alex-fs7cf 4 года назад

This is a great video man! Thanks and keep up the good content!

@GeeketcFr 4 года назад

Just found your channel thanks to RU-vid recommandations (you got a new subscriber ^^) and this video is so helpful because I have this exact question but for a 24-70 ... the thing is, I use an APS-C (and probably for a while until they release an Eos R mark 2 ^^) and the 2.8 would help me for that but I don't have very big production project etc that makes me wonder if I shouldn't "upgrade" for an F4 in the beginning that would anyway bring me way more quality .. And this quality could help to reach bigger projects that would involve even better gear ...

@tombuck 4 года назад

Hey, glad you’re here! I think the f4 will work great in a crop sensor camera. That being said, I’m a believer that you should always buy the best you can afford (without going into debt or selling a kidney). The 2.8 is a better lens, but I personally don’t think it’s $1000 better. You could get a second lens like a super sharp prime for less money.

@GeeketcFr 4 года назад

@@tombuck Thanks for the quick answer ! In your video, like you said I honestly don't see a gain worth $1000 ... except for ISO gain but ... probably cheaper to buy a small light or something to balance that ... And I have a 50 1.8 that I could use on the side 🤔 I wanted the 24-70 2.8 to shoot weddings with only this lens but ... yeah ... after I saw your video I'll probably go with the F4 ! Thanks so much

@tombuck 4 года назад

Glad it helped! To be fair, the 24-70 is wonderful for weddings and events.

@MsFlaDentist 5 лет назад

Thank you! This is exactly the info I was looking for. I'm fairly new, and would like a lens good for both video and photo. I'm considering the 2.8 L ii (not the iii) vs the f4. I didn't feel the 2.8 iii gave that much better image stabilization in your video...can you please give me your opinion? I'm trying to decide if the f4 would be better due to the IS, or if the 2.8lens would hold its value more and be better , even though just 1 stop. when I last looked I think the 2.8 ii is about $200-$300 more than the f4 with IS.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

If you can find one, the version II is a great deal, and I'd probably go with the 2.8 for that price. I don't think 1 extra stop is worth $1000, but I think it's definitely worth $200(ish).

@Alvin-eq5rc 2 года назад

I found the 16-35mm 2.8 (1st gen) and the f4 used at the exact same price in my local area. Not sure if the optical quality would be as sharp as the newer f4 but the 2.8 would be great for some extra bokeh/indoors. quite difficult to pick one between these 2

@TheAmirsialkoti 4 месяца назад

Very well explained

@mr.h3603 4 года назад

Great comparison, especially keeping it nice, simple and with real world samples. Just what I needed to make up my mind, thanks. F4 for me, saved the $1k towards another prime 👌

@tombuck 4 года назад

Glad it helped! I sure you’ll love the f4- it’s a remarkable lens!

@mr.h3603 4 года назад

The Enthusiasm Project liked and subscribed btw. Look forward to seeing new videos and catching up on the old ones :)

@fergskitchen 3 года назад

super helpful video. cheers!

@tombuck 3 года назад

Happy to hear that! 👍

@RiffsAndBeards 5 лет назад

I split the difference and got the new Sigma Art 14-24 f2.8 for $1400. Also plz do a video about your light back there :)

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Ooh, I’ve been curious about that Art lens! The light is a Dracast Silkray 800 that I borrowed to experiment with. It’s big, thin, bright, and nicely diffused. I like it so far 👍

@UCTeeth 5 лет назад

I am also very curious about this Art lens? is it worth it? 14-24 is pretty dang wide

@forsterl.stewart414 3 года назад

Sigma is a third party lens company that when spare part or repairs are needed they won't be available. Along time ago when I first tried a 28-235 image stabilized lens. I had an option in 1999 of Canon's first image stabilized 35mm lens in the world to use on my EOS 3 film camera. Or later sigma copied Canon's ideal. And I opted for the sigma 28 -135 f 3.5 /4 image stabilized. And after three years the auto focus stopped functioning andthe lens was discontonued so spare parts were no longer available. So repair was out of the question. I contacted sigma they said they could sell me a replacement lens of a different zoom range. So it was then I purchased the Canon version and I'm still using that lens on Canon digital bodies. So buy Nikon,Sony or Canon you won't be let down. And ultra wide lenses at ranges greater than 16mm is very hard to construct and get a good image that's why my Canon 11-24 mm f4 costed so much it took Canon years to prefect that lens and did they ever accomplish that, it's tack sharp at all settings. Like the Canon 16-35 mm f4 i.s. CANON ULTRA WIDE ZOOMS ARE FAR SUPERIOR TO ALL LENS MANUFACTURES AND COST LESS THAN NIKON.

@luxuriousfir 2 года назад

@@forsterl.stewart414 is f 2.8 lens substantially sharper than the F4? I do real estate photography and I'm looking to upgrade. I just want something extremely sharp and brilliant: D

@doubledrizzle 3 года назад

vlogging on a 6d mk2 is OVERKILL - that is a camera that deserves time out in the field! Thank you for the review between the 2.8 and 4.0, definitely helped guide my purchase decision

@tombuck 3 года назад

Glad it helped!

@robinchollet7571 3 года назад

Thanks for the review ;) As i expected, the f4 is more useful when you're a photographer and videomaker. I'm so excited to have this lens in my hand *-*

@tombuck 3 года назад

It’s a great one!

@charligebeyaw7915 5 лет назад

Thank you

@bombzproductions9595 2 года назад

I came here for the image shart. Lol this video helped me very much. Got the f4. Thanks!

@AM2PMReviews 4 года назад

I just heard the Sigma has a new 16mm f1.4 for canon mirrorless! So I don’t know if I should get the sigma 24 with my speedbooster Or the new sigma 16mm

@tombuck 4 года назад

I heard about that one too! It’s a tough choice. I still like this one because it’s easy to swap between the R and 6D II.

@ricknunez7134 4 года назад

@@tombuck for sure. The fact that it is not a huge lens. You could rotate that lens on the R and 6D II. That is a huge bonus in my book.

@nadiazayatmakeup 4 года назад

Hey, great video. I personally don't see a huge difference between both of them for video. Probably you can get better pictures with the 2.8 but for video I think the 4f is better, especially since the 2.8 f doesn't have image stabilisation .. (which surprised me btw 🤷🏻‍♀️) and it's heavier..

@tombuck 4 года назад

I really love the f4! It’s been two years and it’s still great 😎

@jonasvw 4 года назад

Gread video, really helped a lot :)

@tombuck 4 года назад

Awesome! Hopefully you get the lens that's right for you 👍

@jonasvw 4 года назад

@@tombuck Yeah, I'll get the f4. That's a good solution for me

@jlopezphotography 4 года назад

You helped me make my mind . I just ordered the F4, thank you!

@tombuck 4 года назад

That's awesome to hear! It's such a great lens- I'm sure you'll love it!

@PhillipRPeck 3 года назад

I found a used 16-35 f/2.8 version 2 lens at my local camera shop for a little under $1000. It's definitely not as sharp as the version 3, and probably not as sharp as the f/4, but I really love the way it looks nonetheless. It's hard to go wrong with a Canon L-series lens

@tombuck 3 года назад

Absolutely. I've have my 24-105L for about 7 years, and it was at least 7 years old when I bought it used. It still works like new!

@PhillipRPeck 3 года назад

@@tombuck I just recently bought a used 24-105 v2 lens as well. Just an all around useful lens

@jessy2280 2 года назад

Loved your video! I’m trying to buy a new lens …. And my goal is to buy a lens that can be used in many different ways/purposes. Mostly for photography :) would the f4 be a good one? Thank you for your time!!!

@tombuck 2 года назад

If you’re mainly going for photography and you don’t planning on shooting low light with short exposure time, the f4 should be great. 👍

@norfolknonsense7578 4 года назад

Very helpful, thanks for sharing. How is the autofocus noise on the 16-35 2.8 III? I have the version II and it is horrible. Lots of rumble and rattle which is impossible to get around with a hotshoe mic.

@tombuck 4 года назад

The III isn’t bad. You can hear it, but I don’t think it’d cause many issues. I haven’t heard the II myself, so I can’t make a direct comparison.

@norfolknonsense7578 4 года назад

@@tombuckThat's good to know, thanks. How does it compare to the f4?

@GavinFuller 4 года назад

Ah man, this video is SUPER helpful for me right now. I stupidly got a ton of dust on my 17-40 a few months back and am looking to upgrade. I think you just talked me into 2.8...gah!

@tombuck 4 года назад

It’s a good excuse, especially if you’ve already had an f4!

3 года назад

Im glad i found this. I like your art lens better.

@SnakeDelta 4 года назад

i think the difference with the two lenses if you take night, astro photography go for the f/2.8 i went for the f/4 version personally the image stability is a must for me

@tombuck 4 года назад

The IS is an awesome feature. And long exposures work very well with f4 for sure.

@headbang3r519 9 месяцев назад

Unless I am doing portraits, I am not too fussed about aperture. When I do street, landscaping, and architecture, I deliberately underexpose the image to save as much detail as possible. I keep it at F8 or above. This way, via Lightroom I can bring out those details. It just looks better than apposed to allowing the exposure to reduce the dept. The EF 16-35 IS F4 is one of my favorite lenses. I mainly shoot during day time. I hardly ever used this lens at F4 during day for street photography.

@santosodenny4543 4 года назад

I do not know, I think f4 is better in terms of color

@hassanmetwally-thebullyyar6423 3 года назад

Great video Tom 👍, What do you think at the moment 16-35mm f4 IS And the 16-35mm f2.8 mark ii are under the same price which one do you recommend ?

@tombuck 3 года назад

You can't go wrong either way. If you want better low light and slightly more shallow depth of field, go for the 2.8. If you want the benefit of stabilization or plan to do a lot of landscape photos, the f4 is terrific. And, for what it's worth, I like that the f4 has a 77mm diameter (it works with all the filters I already had).

@hassanmetwally-thebullyyar6423 3 года назад

@@tombuck Just bought the 2.8 mark ii And it’s great 😁, thanks a lot Tom keep up the good work 💪

@y2ktube 2 года назад

Video @10:00 - "I can Stop that Down all the way to" - Just a minor point. You don't stop-down to f/2.8 (wide-open). You stop-down to f/22 (smallest aperture) etc. One Opens-Up the aperture to let's say f/2.8...

@tombuck 2 года назад

True- I definitely misspoke there.

@DB-nl9xw 4 года назад

Sample shoots and footage would be great

@VJNguyen79 3 года назад

I'm late to the party but this is exactly what I needed. Like most people, I am enamored by the f2.8 and wondered if it was worth the money. This video helped me eliminate the RF 15-35 and the f2.8 version but now I also want a Sigma 24mm f1.4.

@tombuck 3 года назад

The Sigma 24 is an unbelievable lens. Check canonpricewatch.com for lens prices (this sounds like an ad, but it's not, I promise).

@VJNguyen79 3 года назад

@@tombuck Thanks for the tip, I'll be keeping my eye out!

@StephenSE9 5 лет назад

Bloody good thumbnail, that. 👏👏👏👍

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Thanks Stephen! I always struggle with thumbnails...

@ramfiscruz5626 Год назад

Hi What if they were both the same price or fairly close like a $100 difference which one would you pick? I have a opportunity to grab one of them(mark iii 2.8 or 4) but they are close to the same price which one would you recommend? I do photography mainly but I do want to get into video

@tombuck Год назад

If they're both basically the same price, I would go for the 2.8 just because that extra stop is awesome to have.

@ramfiscruz5626 Год назад

@@tombuck so the IS isn’t necessary then? should video be stable enough on the 2.8?

@myopictopics7258 4 года назад

Just curious, did you consider the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 Art ? It is much cheaper than the Canon L lens and at an F1.8 it will give you more of the shallow depth of field you mentioned you were looking for in the F2.8. I am considering it for my next glass purchase over the Canon lenses.

@tombuck 4 года назад

It’s a really great lens, but doesn’t work with full frame cameras. If I had a crop camera, I would absolutely own one. 👍

@myopictopics7258 4 года назад

@@tombuck Forgot you were shooting on the 6D, shutter carnage if you tried to use the Sigma on that!

@tombuck 4 года назад

I’ve since gotten the EOS R too, which does have a crop mode to accommodate EF-S lenses, but I’m too much of a full frame addict.

@FranciscoAlvarezTV 4 года назад

I just ordered this from eBay for $691 (shipping included). Hope I agree with you!

@tombuck 4 года назад

Great deal! 😮

@risbill1 4 года назад

That sigma 24 looks awesome for this video. I was looking at a lightly used 16-35 2.8L version 1 today for $500. Still not sure if it's a good deal.

@tombuck 4 года назад

That sounds like a pretty sweet deal. But yes, I absolutely love the 24mm.

@cmiller4525 3 года назад

I would say though that most canon DSLR's don't have inbuilt image stabilisation like the 6d Mk II or the mirrorless R5 you're using. It almost looks as if the f/4 is not working well (in sync together) with the inbuilt stabilisation of the R5. It looks a little shakier than the R5 working alone with f/2.8... hmmm I wonder if it's any better with the 6D Mk II as it's designed primarily for a DSLR? If so with the mirrorless then a non-image stabilised 16-35 would be the better option..🤔I suppose for filming that would be the answer, but if it's for general photography, can it be counted on that the f/2.8 actually has better sharpness and depth of field significant enough for the price increase?.... Great real world review btw 👌detailed and certainly helping me make a decision.

@tombuck 3 года назад

Glad it was helpful! Just to clarify- I’m using the original R, which only has electronic stabilization. 👍

@maz1980s 3 года назад

Thanks for the video. Maybe do another video with RF14-35mm f4L IS vs RF15-35mm f2.8L IS. That would be trickier as both have IS.

@tombuck 3 года назад

The 14-35 is interesting, and the f4 vs 2.8 comparison is always tricky too.

@CarlosRodriguez-vg8hp 4 года назад

Gracias amigo, me hiciste ahorrar 1000 dolares; voy a comprar f4. Tenia muchas dudas y con tu consejo se despejaron.

@InfernoBaybeee 3 года назад

I found both f2.8 used for 800 and it is in excellent condition. For that price would you still choose the f4 over the f2.8? I also have the EOS R which has Digital IS, ....does that help with overall choosing the f2.8?

@tombuck 3 года назад

If price is the same, I see no reason not to go for the 2.8. The R’s built in stabilization is really good, despite what most reviews say.

@InfernoBaybeee 3 года назад

@@tombuck the f2.8 II not the III. So for the price I should get the 2.8 ii instead of the f4? If so thank you for your help

@Flashbacksss-tp7zb 3 года назад

Thanks.

@daviday87 Год назад

What if you were buying on the secondhand market and saw both offered at the exact same price: which would you pick at that point? (Both of them near me are being bargained off between €500 and €600 depending on the days I look here in France).

@tombuck Год назад

All things being equal I would definitely choose the 2.8 👍

@daviday87 Год назад

@@tombuck Thanks for the insight and the super quick reply!

@pakhoyik9259 4 года назад

Woo，that's a great show. maybe I will buy sigma 24 F1.4 first for the vlog! thank you.

@tombuck 4 года назад

Thanks, I’m sure you’ll love it 👍

@pakhoyik9259 4 года назад

@@tombuck I got it! It's great!!

@darkcarbonproductions8881 4 года назад

With a metabones speedbooster on my bmpcc4k, I'll get 2.6 out of F/4.

@erico6247 3 года назад

The 2.8 is a superior lens for outdoor photography and landscaping, especially at lowlights situations!

@luxuriousfir 2 года назад

what do you think as far sa sharpness goes compared to the f4? I do real estate photography and am looking to upgrade from my cannon ef 17-40 . I want something tac sharp and brilliant: D

@zorawarmanchanda5397 Год назад

I think for landscape you will anyway stop down for greater depth of field so that does not make any difference. Plus the is you get is a much better thing Regards

@forsterl.stewart414 3 года назад

Canon 16-35 mm f4 image stabilized lens brought state of the art sharpness to Canon's ultra wide lenses. Only the newer 11-24 f4 or the 16-35 f2.8 miii are as sharp but neither of these lenses have image stabilization. And all other ultra wides are inferior. Check out the mtf charts of any of these lense against the 16- 35mm f2.8, 16-35 f2.8 mii. Or the 17-40mm f4. I use both the 11-24 f4 and the 16-35 mm f4 i.s. for all my archetecture and landscape as well as commercial work. The f4 version is as sharp plus image stabilized and is less expensive as the 2.8 miii version. More cost effective and one stop.of light loss is not that important even in interiors for me. You have the image stabilization option if you don't have your tripod. But I always have a tripod in my kit bag.

@tombuck 3 года назад

I didn’t know it was such an upgrade to sharpness- thanks for the info.

@luxuriousfir 2 года назад

I have the 17 to 40 mm. Do you think it would be that much more of an upgrade? I'm debating whether or not I should just upgrade my lens or go to a full on mirrorless set up.

@comments7335 3 года назад

This was very helpful,thank you. Other examples you could have shown is by taking photos outdoors so we can gauge the difference in sharpness, bokeh,vignetting,chromatic aberration and image quality. Still, your video is good for those doing blogs and videos.

@tombuck 3 года назад

Thanks! I do focus mostly on video personally, so that's the perspective I took with the video. Anecdotally, I can say that the 2.8 is sharper, but I don't know if it's enough of a difference to justify the price.

@comments7335 3 года назад

@@tombuck thnks for replying.stay safe👌

@melodychest9020 4 года назад

Background blur also depends on where your focus points are .. you didn't talk about that setting. With a really near focus point you will get lots more background blur versus a distant focus point where you will get lesser background blur .. it is all relative to the focus point in question. In this case, you are are about 3 feet away from the lens and the wall behind you is not too far out for you to notice the background blur whether it is a 2.8 or a 4.0. If you were outdoors you will notice that the background video blur or bokeh in stills in a 2.8 is way better than a 4.0.

@tombuck 4 года назад

All very true. It would look totally different outdoors in a landscape setting.

@anthonyS84235 3 года назад

Great video - good to know that the difference between F4 & 2.8 is not that significant. Have you looked into the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 Art DC HSM Lens for Canon?

@tombuck 3 года назад

It’s a wonderfully lens and I use it regularly at my work. But it’s mainly designed for crop sensor cameras, and I prefer full frame 👍

@anthonyS84235 3 года назад

@@tombuck Very good point Tom - I missed that! I am new to video recording for RU-vid. Trying to get a good shot of me playing bass with my studio in the background... I will order the Sigma 24mm F1.4 for full frame - your video is among the best I have seen to really show what it does with great comparisons. So you have not yet found a fine full frame prime lens wider than 20mm for aperture larger than F2 that would work with the Canon EOS R and be reasonably priced?

@tombuck 3 года назад

20mm is about as far as you can go within reason. But on full frame That’s very very wide.

@almirmusanovic513 4 года назад

Thank you, great video. I am more than a beginer and i am so confused..can i set 16-35mm F4 lense to shoot at 24mm or i have to buy 24mm prime? I cannot buy both of them..i want to shoot product videos like you..plus i want to shoot outdoor cinematic videos...please can someone help me..i will buy sony a7iii. Btw great channel, videos and everything... Sorry for bad english.

@tombuck 4 года назад

You can set a 16-35mm to 24, but it won’t have the same shallow depth of field as a prime lens, so you won’t get backgrounds that are quite as blurry. Just something to be aware of. 👍

@almirmusanovic513 4 года назад

@@tombuck thank you so much..please tell me just one more thing..what size of ND filter do i need for 35mm lense? Or 24mm? I am very confused when it comes to numbers...

@tombuck 4 года назад

It depends on the lens. Each lens will have its filter diameter printed on the front- it is a different number than focal length (so a 24mm lens could have a 77mm filter size).

@AntonioVillagomez 5 лет назад

Great stuff man, I was thinking about making a video about why the 16-35 2.8 is currently my favorite lens. I might steal some of your info :) Thank you for posting this.

@tombuck 5 лет назад

Haha, steal away! I’d love to hear your perspective as a 2.8 owner.

@jeffmcclain 3 года назад

Good review. I think you're nuts to have IS on during walk-around video blogging...you actually bounce around in frame more than the non IS if you watch close. If you really want good "gimbal" action...get a gimbal and save the $$$ and you'll be wow-ed.

@AZGearGuy 3 года назад

Where could I find a desk like yours??

@tombuck 3 года назад

It’s a Husky work bench from Home Depot 👍

@joaquinloustaueisele4216 2 года назад

Great video

@tombuck 2 года назад

Thanks!

@JimmyCheng 4 года назад

awesome, I think your 24 art is really really good for talking heads like this.

@tombuck 4 года назад

I love it! It's my favorite focal length for sure.

@jeffbaumet794 4 года назад

Great video Dude!!! if i had watched this last year i might have gotten the f4. i did get the 2.8 and i love it but i would still like the $1K

@tombuck 4 года назад

I guess that’s better than getting the 4 and wishing you had the 2.8- they’re both wonderful lenses!

@jeffbaumet794 4 года назад

@@tombuck I just bought a 24-105 f4L ii. so i should be ok for most purposes except that both are a bit heavy. i am beginning to learn the benefits of lighter weight equipment haha...

@tombuck 4 года назад

It’s tough to balance features and size, figuratively and literally.

@Pramoduncan 4 года назад

Sorry but it's been 4 days searching how to cut that time bar thing in your video. Can you please share that.. My second time seeing such, first was of epidemic. I really like this cut style in progress bar.

@tombuck 4 года назад

Are you talking about the markers that show up in the progress bar of the RU-vid player? It’s a new feature RU-vid added this week. If you put time stamps in the description of your video, it automatically marks them on the progress bar. I really like it 👍

@Pramoduncan 4 года назад

@@tombuck that easily?? Thankyou sir.. Subbed from 🇳🇵..

@Pramoduncan 4 года назад

correction: Sorry but as you said youtube added this feature this week but you started doing this 9 months ago and that video was Canon eos r-top 5 underrated features, I put time markers on description but it doesn't do..maybe there's a subscription count like less than 5k get lost or something..lol..I wanted to do this in my wife's fitness channel so it would have been easier..you know..

@tombuck 4 года назад

The upload date shouldn’t matter as long as the time stamps are in the description, so this could show up on older videos. I’m not sure how they decide which accounts to use it on. It might be a new feature that’s being tested randomly. 🤷🏻‍♂️

@Pramoduncan 4 года назад

@@tombuck oh yea, so sorry, maybe this corona thing messed up my brain..lol..anyways thankyou for your time..3840*1920 rock and this progress bar surely rocks.

@lyfka9969 4 года назад

Excellent tutto!

@Leestevensmusic 4 года назад

I plan on buying one of these lenses I think I'm gonna buy either the first one for 440 used, or the mark II for like 970 used. Would you reccomend the first or second version of this lens?

@tombuck 4 года назад

The Mark II is going to be a bit better if you can swing it with your budget. Image quality is terrific on both, but the II has updated autofocus, which is nice.

@Leestevensmusic 4 года назад

@@tombuck Do you think it's worth buying the mark II?

@tombuck 4 года назад

Absolutely!

@Leestevensmusic 4 года назад

@@tombuck Thanks for replying.

@Leestevensmusic 4 года назад

@@tombuck Would you go for the 2.8 mk II or the F4 for shooting video in a small room?

@nathftn 4 года назад

I'd like to see a bokeh ball comparison tho. I still purchased the F4 thanks to your video since I bought it for landscapes photography use. Since landscapes are made between f8 - 11 I think I made the right choice going F4.

@tombuck 4 года назад

For landscapes, it's a fantastic choice. If you haven't seen it, Thomas Heaton made a whole video on how he uses the F4 for landscapes and gets outstanding results.

@nathftn 4 года назад

@@tombuck I'll check this out right now !! I've seen in another video that the f4 also has kind of more contrasts. Which is also good for landscapes !

@nathftn 4 года назад

@@tombuck man, thank you for giving me this channel. I learn so much out of it !

@jonathanmini6206 4 года назад

Just watched the potato version of this video where he reads a comment from you in his review. And you've got a review/diffs video too. I like it, stay on that hustle and glad you went more tech and applications comparisons than the jet's hair torching video but both are exceptionally useful. Considering I want to shoot bmx and have noticed my 6dii plus 70-200 2.8 is ridiculously better than my 80d and 10-18 (i know, apples and oranges) but I may have to rent the 2.8 and 4 to see which works better for my video needs.

@tombuck 4 года назад

Haha, I was very shocked to see my name pop up in that video! But yeah, if you can try each out, that’s the best way to decide. The 2.8 is a beautiful lens, but I’ve been more than happy with the f4 👍

@jonathanmini6206 4 года назад

@@tombuck Thank you for the reply! I went with the f4 and love the improvement. Well worth it and I don't need to buy new filters so I'm happy. You're internet famous! Bask in the glory hahah thank you again!

@sottheaphoeurng9044 4 года назад

Hi sir. I use canon 6D ii. I want to buy Canon 16 35f4 l is USM. I want to hear some your ideas about distortion, chromatic aberration, and vignetting. I don't work in computer a lot. So is it still good for me to buy ?

@tombuck 4 года назад

Are you using it for photo or video? It’s an absolutely outstanding landscape lens, but at f4, it’s not the best in low light conditions. There is slight vignetting at 16mm, but it hasn’t been an issue for me (I actually kind of like it). Distortion depends mostly on your focal length and angle- it can be noticeable or dramatic. And I have t had issues with chromatic abberation, although I do usually remove it by default in Lightroom.

@sottheaphoeurng9044 4 года назад

@@tombuck I shoot only picture but maybe later I may shoot video too. I don't correct my pictures in light room a lot. I just add more color and Bright light in my Ipad. So it hard to remove distortion.

@sottheaphoeurng9044 4 года назад

@@tombuck sigma 14 24mm f2.8 $1,200. It seems very good image quality too.

@tombuck 4 года назад

That’s a REALLY terrific lens. The only downside is that it’s very big and heavy. But otherwise it’s outstanding.

@sottheaphoeurng9044 4 года назад

The Enthusiasm Project I don't mind a big lens If it can use ND filter especially 77mm filter. Because later I want to buy 70 200mm III and 85mm l is. So if I have ultra wide lens with 77mm filter I need only 1 filter to apply all my lenses.

@DayPartyExperience Месяц назад

Went with the 2.8

@joonwolf6817 4 года назад

I know you said the f4 is more worth it but would you take the f/2.8 if you were able to find it for only $100 more than the f/4?

@tombuck 4 года назад

Yes, that’d be a great deal!

@FelixLarios1234 4 года назад

What lens are you using now

@tombuck 4 года назад

My main lens is the Sigma 24 1.4, but I also use my 16/35 f4 very often.

@xrjromo7167 5 лет назад

I'm using m50,, what do you recommend? 16-35 F4 or F2.8? this is with speed booster.. btw most of the time im shooting in lowlight and my content mostly is in the gym.. much appreciate if you answer this question.. Thankyou brotha!

@tombuck 5 лет назад

If you’re doing mostly low light and have the budget, the 2.8 is probably a good choice. It’ll definitely outweigh the M50, but should get some great results.

@xrjromo7167 5 лет назад

@@tombuck really appreciate your answer man!~btw no prob with the weight^^ check my channel hehe

@tukmol5881 4 года назад

I am definitely going for Sigma 1.4 after seeing this video.

@tombuck 4 года назад

I’ve officially had it for a year and it’s been on my camera 90% of that time. Such an incredible lens!

@Savage1776_ 4 года назад

I have the sigma art 18 to 35 and 50 to 100 1.8 for crop sensor and they're amazing. I use the 18 to 35 on my Canon EOS R all the time. Sigma is making amazing lenses these days

@tombuck 4 года назад

Does the 18-35 work well on the R?

@b47d16 4 года назад

@@Savage1776_ hows the auto focus on that? Ive read some reviews saying the auto focus is really slow and bad which is keeping me from buying it

@paymeinglitternow2775 3 года назад

Omg!! The best beginner video thank you so much!

@tombuck 3 года назад

You’re welcome!

@Yofidelaguilar 4 года назад

Is the f4 one have noisy autofocus. My 24-70 is so noisy

@tombuck 4 года назад

I don't have a technical way to quantify the noise, but I'd say it's about "average." It's not overly distracting to me, but it's also not silent either.

@ShoppingQueen2.0 8 месяцев назад

2.8 and 4 are too little different. Plus IS is a bonus for me as I don’t use tripod that much. lol and then…not much chances to use 2.8 so light depth.