I replaced my 17-35 with this lens 3 months ago. The 17-35 was sold before the 16-35 was delivered, so comparisons are from experience/memory rather than a side by side test.
Build quality of the 16-35 is more 'L' -like than it's predecessor. Optically better, especially noticeable wide open with no obvious colour fringing/smearing in the corners. It seems a little contrastier wide open, definitely easier to focus manually. Slight vignetting at f/2.8 at the wide end, but better than the 17-35. Very slight barrel distortion at the wide end at infinity, becoming more pronounced as focused distance decreases. This curious phenomenon was also true of the 17-35, but is better controlled in the newer lens. Having said that, bear in mind that the newer lens focuses considerably closer. Don't underestimate the practical value of this change. From 20-35 rectilinear distortion is non existent. I'm happy to use this lens for architectural subjects (at/near infinity) and I'm quite picky. A normal thickness polariser is no problem, in fact it's possible to use a Cokin P rectangular filter in a one slot holder (hack saw the front two off) from about 18mm onward. IMO, this is an excellent lens, better in almost every respect than it's predecessor. Almost? Well, it's a little bigger and heavier. Very happy to have made the change. Craig Z * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
